Title: In re Disqualification of George

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

[Cite as In re Disqualification of George, 100 Ohio St.3d 1241, 2003-Ohio-5489.] 
 
 
Opinion in Chambers, per Moyer, C.J. 
 
IN RE DISQUALIFICATION OF GEORGE. 
SIMMONS v. GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF AKRON, INC. 
[Cite as In re Disqualification of George, 100 Ohio St.3d 1241, 2003-Ohio-
5489.] 
Judges — Affidavit of disqualification — Judge’s comments in prior case do not 
demonstrate bias, prejudice, or ill will, when. 
(No. 02-AP-129 — Decided April 2, 2003.) 
ON AFFIDAVIT OF DISQUALIFICATION in Summit County Common Pleas Court 
case No. CV 98 03 1125. 
__________________ 
 
MOYER, C.J. 
{¶1} 
This affidavit of disqualification was filed by Richard L. Henning, 
counsel for plaintiff Roger Simmons, seeking the disqualification of Judge Joyce 
J. George from further proceedings in the above-captioned case.  Judge George is 
a retired judge of the Ninth District Court of Appeals sitting by assignment of the 
Chief Justice. 
{¶2} 
Affiant’s allegations against Judge George arise from her 
participation in an earlier case in the Wayne County Common Pleas Court, Smith 
et al. v. Wayne Cty. Dept. of Human Serv. et al., case No. 99-CV-0052.  Affiant 
also represented the plaintiffs in that case.  Affiant argues that statements by 
Judge George in rulings that she issued in the Smith case demonstrate an 
“animus” and “negative attitude” towards affiant that will prejudice his client in 
the underlying case. 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
{¶3} 
To support his allegations, affiant refers to statements by Judge 
George in her January 29, 2002 ruling in the Smith case granting summary 
judgment for the defendants.  In that ruling, Judge George stated that “[t]he 
Plaintiffs’ complaint consists of 26 unnumbered pages.”  Affiant Henning 
“interprets this comment as yet another example of the Court’s disdain for and 
animus toward affiant.”  In that same paragraph, Judge George said that “[t]he 
language and sentence structure of the Complaint make it difficult to understand,” 
which “Affiant [Henning] believes that this is simply another example of an 
unnecessary slap at Affiant.” 
{¶4} 
In her response to the affidavit of disqualification, Judge George 
denied any bias, prejudice, or ill feelings toward affiant, his client, or any other 
participant in the case. 
{¶5} 
The statutory right to seek disqualification of a judge is an 
extraordinary remedy. In re Disqualification of Hunter (1988), 36 Ohio St.3d 607, 
522 N.E.2d 461. 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 Olivito (1994), 74 Ohio St.3d 1261, 657 
N.E.2d 1361. On the record before me, I do not find that Judge George’s 
statements “impl[y] a hostile feeling or spirit of ill-will,” State ex rel. Pratt v. 
Weygandt (1956), 164 Ohio St. 463, 469, 58 O.O. 315, 132 N.E.2d 191, or 
otherwise suggest that affiant or his client will not be treated fairly and 
impartially.  For this reason, the affidavit of disqualification is found not well 
taken and is denied.  The matter shall continue before Judge George. 
__________________