Title: In re Disqualification of Gill

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Cite as In re Disqualification of Gill, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2019-Ohio-3743.] 
 
 
 
IN RE DISQUALIFICATION OF GILL. 
TASSONE v. TASSONE. 
[Cite as In re Disqualification of Gill, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2019-Ohio-3743.] 
Judges—Affidavits 
of 
disqualification—R.C. 
2701.03—Affiant 
failed 
to 
demonstrate bias or prejudice—Disqualification denied. 
(No. 19-AP-066—Decided June 6, 2019.) 
ON AFFIDAVITS OF DISQUALIFICATION in Franklin County Court of Common 
Pleas, Domestic Relations Division, Case No. 17DR004399. 
____________ 
O’CONNOR, C.J. 
{¶ 1} Defendant Matthew Tassone has filed two more affidavits with the 
clerk of this court pursuant to R.C. 2701.03 seeking to disqualify Judge Elizabeth 
Gill from presiding over any further proceedings in the above-referenced case.  Mr. 
Tassone has filed several previous meritless affidavits of disqualification against 
Judge Gill.  See case Nos. 18-AP-088, 18-AP-129, and 19-AP-062.  Mr. Tassone 
captioned his June 4, 2019 filing as a “supplemental” affidavit, likely because he 
was unaware that when he filed the document, the affidavit he filed in the third 
disqualification proceeding had already been denied.  The clerk therefore assigned 
a new case number to the affidavit filed on June 4.  Mr. Tassone thereafter filed a 
second “supplemental” affidavit. 
{¶ 2} In the first pending affidavit, Mr. Tassone primarily criticizes and 
challenges the veracity of statements in Judge Gill’s response to the affidavit of 
disqualification he filed in case No. 19-AP-062.  However, S.Ct.Prac.R. 21.02(C) 
provides that “[n]o reply to a response from the judge shall be permitted.”  Mr. 
Tassone cannot circumvent this rule by labeling his filing a “supplemental” 
affidavit.  And to the extent that Mr. Tassone’s affidavit is an attempt to prove that 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
 
2
Judge Gill’s response itself is evidence of bias or prejudice, his argument is not well 
taken.  He has failed to prove that the judge’s response demonstrates that she has 
hostility toward him or a fixed anticipatory judgment on any issue in the underlying 
case. 
{¶ 3} In his second pending affidavit, Mr. Tassone alleges that Judge Gill, 
a magistrate, and an attorney in the underlying case engaged in fraudulent conduct.  
However, “[a]llegations that are based solely on hearsay, innuendo, and 
speculation—such as those alleged here—are insufficient to establish bias or 
prejudice.”  In re Disqualification of Flanagan, 127 Ohio St.3d 1236, 2009-Ohio-
7199, 937 N.E.2d 1023, ¶ 4; see also In re Disqualification of Walker, 36 Ohio 
St.3d 606, 522 N.E.2d 460 (1988) (“vague, unsubstantiated allegations of the 
affidavit are insufficient on their face for a finding of bias or prejudice”). 
{¶ 4} As noted above, Mr. Tassone has previously filed several other 
affidavits seeking Judge Gill’s disqualification from the underlying case—all of 
which have been meritless.  “[T]he filing of frivolous, unsubstantiated, or repeated 
affidavits of disqualification is contrary to the purpose of R.C. 2701.03 and a waste 
of judicial resources.”  In re Disqualification of Browne, 136 Ohio St.3d 1279, 
2013-Ohio-4468, 996 N.E.2d 944, ¶ 8. 
{¶ 5} The affidavits of disqualification are denied. 
________________________