Title: In re Disqualification of Bryant

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Cite as In re Disqualification of Bryant, 117 Ohio St.3d 1251, 2006-Ohio-7227.] 
 
 
IN RE DISQUALIFICATION OF BRYANT ET AL. 
LESLIE v. OHIO DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT. 
[Cite as In re Disqualification of Bryant,  
117 Ohio St.3d 1251, 2006-Ohio-7227.] 
Judges – Affidavit of disqualification – Disqualification denied. 
(No. 06AP-057—Decided June 29, 2006.) 
ON AFFIDAVIT OF DISQUALIFICATION in Franklin County  
Court of Appeals Case No. 06-APE-628. 
__________________ 
Reporter’s Note:  The previously published version of this opinion  
omitted a complete citation that has been added to this version of 
 the opinion.  This version of the opinion supersedes the version  
that appears at 113 Ohio St.3d 1217, 863 N.E.2d 622. 
___________________ 
 
 
MOYER, C.J. 
{¶ 1} Plaintiff Mark A. Leslie has filed an affidavit with the Clerk of this 
court under R.C. 2501.13 seeking the disqualification of Judges Bryant, French, 
Klatt, and Travis from acting on any further proceedings in case No. 06-APE-628 
in the Court of Appeals for Franklin County. 
{¶ 2} Leslie alleges that he has challenged various actions of officials in 
the administration of Governor Taft, and he contends that Judges French, Klatt, 
and Travis – all of whom were appointed by the governor – should not be 
permitted to act on his case.  He also states that Judge Bryant ruled against him in 
an earlier case and therefore ought to be disqualified from hearing this latest 
appeal. 
{¶ 3} I find no basis for ordering the disqualification of the three judges 
appointed by the governor.  “Many judges were involved in politics before taking 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
the bench,” and “[p]olitics plays a role in appointment to judicial office.”  In re 
Mason (C.A.7, 1990), 916 F.2d 384, 385, 386 (holding that a judge was not 
disqualified from a case even though he had made preappointment contributions 
to the campaigns of two of the defendants).  We presume, however, that judges 
are able to set aside any partisan interests once they have assumed judicial office 
and have taken an oath to decide cases on the facts and the law before them.  As 
Judge Easterbrook noted in the Mason case, “Chief Justice Burger wrote an 
opinion that led to the resignation of the President who gave him that office.”  Id. 
at 387. 
{¶ 4} There is likewise no basis for Judge Bryant’s removal.  The fact 
that Leslie did not prevail in an earlier case does not demonstrate that the judge 
was then or is now biased against him.  State and federal courts have been 
virtually unanimous in holding that – absent a showing of actual bias – a judge 
who presided over prior proceedings involving one or more parties presently 
before the court is not thereby disqualified from presiding over later proceedings 
involving the same parties.  Flamm, Judicial Disqualification (1996) 345, Section 
12.3.1.  See, e.g., State v. D’Ambrosio (1993), 67 Ohio St.3d 185, 188, 616 
N.E.2d 909 (“A judge need not recuse himself simply because he acquired 
knowledge of the facts during a prior proceeding”); United Union of Roofers, 
Waterproofers & Allied Workers, Local No. 33 v. Meese (C.A.1, 1987), 823 F.2d 
652, 659 (“It is well established * * * that participation in prior proceedings 
involving the same or similar facts or parties does not in itself constitute grounds 
for disqualification”). 
{¶ 5} As I have said, “[a] judge is presumed to follow the law and not to 
be biased, and the appearance of bias or prejudice must be compelling to 
overcome these presumptions.”  In re Disqualification of George, 100 Ohio St.3d 
1241, 2003-Ohio-5489, 798 N.E.2d 23, ¶ 5.  Those presumptions have not been 
overcome in this case. 
 
3
{¶ 6} For the reasons stated above, the affidavit of disqualification is 
denied.  The case may proceed before Judges Bryant, French, Klatt, Travis, or any 
of their colleagues on the court of appeals. 
_______________________