[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it may be cited as State 

ex rel. Johnson v. Kral, Slip Opinion No. 2018-Ohio-2382.] 

NOTICE 

This slip opinion is subject to formal revision before it is published in an 

advance sheet of the Ohio Official Reports. Readers are requested to 

promptly notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 

South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215, of any typographical or other 

formal errors in the opinion, in order that corrections may be made before 

the opinion is published. 

SLIP OPINION NO. 2018-OHIO-2382

[THE STATE EX REL.] JOHNSON, APPELLANT, v. KRAL, APPELLEE. 

[Until this opinion appears in the Ohio Official Reports advance sheets, it 

may be cited as State ex rel. Johnson v. Kral, Slip Opinion No. 

2018-Ohio-2382.] 

Mandamus—Appellant has adequate remedies in ordinary course of law—Court of 

appeals’ dismissal of complaint affirmed. 

(No. 2017-0969—Submitted December 5, 2017—Decided June 21, 2018.) 

APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Lucas County, No. L-17-1144. 

________________ 

 Per Curiam. 

{¶ 1} Appellant, Tyrone R. Johnson, appeals the decision of the Sixth 

District Court of Appeals dismissing the complaint for a writ of mandamus that he 

filed against appellee, George Kral, Chief of Police of the Toledo police 

department. We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals. 

{¶ 2} In his complaint, Johnson alleged that on August 25, 2000, Lucas 

County Court of Common Pleas Judge Charles Wittenberg granted a motion for the 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

2

return from the Toledo police department of property to him in the amount of $324. 

Rather than comply with the order, the police department allegedly deposited the 

money “into the Lucas County Treasury.” Johnson requested a writ of mandamus 

compelling Chief Kral and the police department to return the $324 and to award 

him compensatory and punitive damages. 

{¶ 3} On June 27, 2017, the court of appeals dismissed the complaint sua 

sponte. 

{¶ 4} A writ of mandamus will not issue if the relator has a plain and 

adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law. State ex rel. Blandin v. Beck, 

114 Ohio St.3d 455, 2007-Ohio-4562, 872 N.E.2d 1232, ¶ 18. Based on the 

allegations in the complaint, Johnson has two separate remedies that preclude the 

issuance of a writ of mandamus. 

{¶ 5} Johnson alleged that the police department has not complied with a 

trial-court order directing a return of the property. If that allegation is true, then a 

motion for contempt for the failure to abide by a court order is an adequate remedy 

in the ordinary course of the law. State ex rel. Weaver v. Adult Parole Auth., 116 

Ohio St.3d 340, 2007-Ohio-6435, 879 N.E.2d 191, ¶ 6. In addition, he has an 

adequate remedy by filing an action for replevin. Blandin at ¶ 18; State ex rel. 

Harris v. Toledo, 74 Ohio St.3d 36, 38, 656 N.E.2d 334 (1995). “The proper action 

to reclaim possession of property based on unlawful seizure or detention is an action 

for replevin.” State ex rel. Jividen v. Toledo Police Dept., 112 Ohio App.3d 458, 

459, 679 N.E.2d 34 (6th Dist.1996). Dismissal of the complaint was therefore 

proper, because Johnson failed to state a claim in mandamus. 

Judgment affirmed. 

O’CONNOR, C.J., and O’DONNELL, KENNEDY, FRENCH, FISCHER, and

DEWINE, JJ., concur. 

DEGENARO, J., not participating. 

_________________ 
January Term, 2018 

3

Tyrone R. Johnson, pro se. 

Adam W. Loukx, Toledo Director of Law, and Jeffrey B. Charles, Assistant 

Director of Law, for appellee. 

_________________