Title: In re Disqualification of Basinski

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Cite as In re Disqualification of Basinski, 100 Ohio St.3d 1213, 2002-Ohio-7466.] 
 
 
 
 
Opinion in Chambers, per Moyer, C.J. 
 
IN RE DISQUALIFICATION OF BASINSKI. 
MAYNARD v. ELLIOTT. 
[Cite as In re Disqualification of Basinski, 100 Ohio St.3d 1213, 2002-Ohio-
7466.] 
Judges — Affidavit of disqualification — Adverse ruling on a continuance or 
other scheduling matters does not demonstrate bias or prejudice. 
 (No. 02-AP-014 — Decided February 18, 2002.) 
ON AFFIDAVIT OF DISQUALIFICATION in Lorain County Common Pleas Court, 
Division of Domestic Relations, case No. 01DR059031. 
__________________ 
MOYER, C.J. 
{¶1} 
This affidavit of disqualification was filed by Brent English, 
counsel for defendant Fred Elliott, seeking the disqualification of Judge David 
Basinski from further proceedings in the above-captioned case. 
{¶2} 
Affiant contends that Judge Basinski is biased against him because 
of circumstances surrounding affiant’s request for a continuance of a trial 
scheduled for January 23, 2002.  Having reviewed the record before me, I cannot 
conclude that affiant has demonstrated the existence of bias or prejudice on the 
part of Judge Basinski.  A judge’s ruling on a request for a continuance or other 
scheduling matters is discretionary, and an adverse ruling on these matters does 
not demonstrate the existence of bias or prejudice.  In re Disqualification of Spahr 
(1987), 36 Ohio St.3d 603, 522 N.E.2d 457. Moreover, a judge will not be 
disqualified because he or she attempts to adhere to a trial schedule and insists on 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
compliance with the mandates of this court’s Rules of Superintendence regarding 
the granting of continuances and the timely disposition of cases. 
{¶3} 
For these reasons, the affidavit of disqualification is found not well 
taken and denied.  The case shall proceed before Judge Basinski. 
__________________