[Cite as In re Disqualification of Pokorny, 135 Ohio St.3d 1268, 2013-Ohio-915.]

IN RE DISQUALIFICATION OF POKORNY. 

SIZEMORE v. FARM CREDIT SERVICES OF MID-AMERICA. 

[Cite as In re Disqualification of Pokorny, 135 Ohio St.3d 1268, 

2013-Ohio-915.] 

Judges—Affidavit of disqualification—R.C. 2701.03—Affiant’s civil suit against 

judge in federal court does not alone constitute grounds for 

disqualification in common pleas court—Alleged bias against women and 

pro se litigants not proven—Disqualification denied.

(No. 13-AP-008—Decided January 29, 2013.) 

ON AFFIDAVIT OF DISQUALIFICATION in Ashland County Court of Common Pleas 

Case No. 11-CIV-371. 

__________________ 

O’CONNOR, C.J. 

{¶ 1} Terrie Sizemore, plaintiff in the underlying case, has filed an 

affidavit with the clerk of this court under R.C. 2701.03 seeking to disqualify 

Judge Thomas John Pokorny, a retired judge sitting by assignment, from 

presiding over any further proceedings in case No. 11-CIV-371, now pending in 

the Court of Common Pleas of Ashland County. 

{¶ 2} According to Sizemore’s affidavit, the initial judge hearing her 

case, Judge Ronald P. Forsthoefel, voluntarily recused himself after Sizemore 

filed a federal civil action against him. Sizemore alleges that his replacement, 

Judge Pokorny, should be disqualified for four main reasons: (1) Sizemore has 

moved to supplement her complaint in the federal case to add Judge Pokorny as a 

defendant, (2) it appears that Judge Pokorny has conspired with Judge Forsthoefel 

and defendant’s counsel, Greg Melick, to conceal material facts and to deny 

Sizemore her right to defend herself, (3) Judge Pokorny appears to be biased 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

2

against women and pro se litigants, and (4) Judge Pokorny has scheduled a 

hearing on defendant’s motion for summary judgment on its counterclaim to 

declare Sizemore a vexatious litigator. 

{¶ 3} For the following reasons, no basis has been established to order 

the disqualification of Judge Pokorny. 

{¶ 4} First, the fact that Sizemore is attempting to name Judge Pokorny 

as a defendant in her federal case does not automatically lead to his 

disqualification in the underlying state-court proceeding. It is well established 

that a judge will not be disqualified solely because a litigant in a case pending 

before the judge has filed a lawsuit against that judge. To hold otherwise would 

invite parties to file lawsuits solely to obtain a judge’s disqualification, which 

would severely hamper the orderly administration of judicial proceedings. See In 

re Disqualification of Hunter, 36 Ohio St.3d 607, 608, 522 N.E.2d 461 (1988); In 

re Disqualification of Kilpatrick, 47 Ohio St.3d 605, 606, 546 N.E.2d 929 (1989). 

{¶ 5} Second, Sizemore has failed to substantiate her claim that Judge 

Pokorny is engaging in a conspiracy with Judge Forsthoefel and Melick. In an 

affidavit-of-disqualification proceeding, the burden falls on the affiant to submit 

sufficient evidence demonstrating that disqualification is warranted. See R.C. 

2701.03(B)(1). The affiant is often required to submit evidence beyond the 

affidavit itself supporting the allegations contained therein. See In re 

Disqualification of DeWine, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2012-Ohio-6288, ___ N.E.2d 

___, ¶ 18. To support her conspiracy claim, Sizemore attached a December 10, 

2012 letter from Judge Forsthoefel to the parties. Judge Forsthoefel attached to 

the letter a copy of the certificate of assignment reassigning Judge Pokorny to the 

case, and he informed the parties that “upon Judge Pokorny’s request,” a hearing 

on the defendant’s motion for summary judgment was scheduled for February 1, 

2013. Sizemore claims that because Judge Forsthoefel had already recused 

himself at the time he sent the letter, his participation gives the “overt appearance 
January Term, 2013 

3

of conspiracy” to deprive her of her federal rights and gives the appearance that 

both judges are conspiring with Melick. But on its face, the letter merely informs 

the parties that Judge Pokorny has scheduled a hearing on a pending motion, and 

Sizemore has acknowledged that she does not have “any way of ascertaining if 

there is a relationship between these two Judges.” Vague or unsubstantiated 

allegations—such as those here—are insufficient to establish bias or prejudice. 

See In re Disqualification of Walker, 36 Ohio St.3d 606, 522 N.E.2d 460 (1988). 

{¶ 6} Third, Sizemore has similarly failed to substantiate her claim that 

Judge Pokorny is biased against female and pro se litigants. Allegations of such 

bias strike at the very heart of the judiciary and are among the most serious and 

damaging that can be directed at a judge. As a result, such claims must be proven 

by clear evidence establishing the existence of bias. See In re Disqualification of 

Cunningham, 100 Ohio St.3d 1216, 2002-Ohio-7470, 798 N.E.2d 4, ¶ 2 (setting 

forth standard for evaluating allegations of racial bias). Sizemore repeatedly 

asserts that Judge Pokorny is biased in favor of men and attorneys—mostly 

because he has promptly responded to the defendant’s motions but has failed to 

rule on Sizemore’s motions. However, Sizemore has not provided any actual 

evidence, beyond speculation or conjecture, to support her assertion that Judge 

Pokorny’s actions are the product of bias—based on gender, pro se status, or 

otherwise. Allegations that are based solely on innuendo and speculation 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. 

{¶ 7} Fourth, the fact that Judge Pokorny has scheduled a hearing on 

defendant’s motion for summary judgment is not grounds for disqualification. 

Sizemore claims that Judge Pokorny scheduled this hearing without legal grounds 

to do so, in violation of the Civil Rules, in violation of her right to a jury trial, and 

without regard to the evidence in the record. It is well settled, however, that a 

party’s disagreement or dissatisfaction with a court’s legal rulings, even if those 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

4

rulings may be erroneous, is not grounds for disqualification. In re 

Disqualification of Floyd, 101 Ohio St.3d 1217, 2003-Ohio-7351, 803 N.E.2d 

818, ¶ 4. Similarly, a judge’s action, or inaction, on a pending motion is within 

the judge’s sound discretion and is not evidence of bias or prejudice. In re 

Disqualification of Eyster, 105 Ohio St.3d 1246, 2004-Ohio-7350, 826 N.E.2d 

304, ¶ 4. Trial judges are entitled to exercise discretion in ruling on many 

matters, and it is not the chief justice’s role in deciding an affidavit of 

disqualification to second-guess each ruling. The remedy for these and other 

legal claims, if any, lies in appeal, not through the filing of an affidavit of 

disqualification. In re Disqualification of Russo, 110 Ohio St.3d 1208, 2005-

Ohio-7146, 850 N.E.2d 713, ¶ 6. 

{¶ 8} Finally, affidavit-of-disqualification proceedings are narrow in 

scope and “ ‘limited to determining whether a judge in a pending case has a bias, 

prejudice, or other disqualifying interest that mandates the judge’s disqualification 

from that case.’ ” In re Disqualification of Griffin, 101 Ohio St.3d 1219, 2003-

Ohio-7356, 803 N.E.2d 820, ¶ 9, quoting In re Disqualification of Kate, 88 Ohio 

St.3d 1208, 1209, 723 N.E.2d 1098 (1999). Many of Sizemore’s allegations in 

her affidavit are directed against Judge Forsthoefel and attorney Melick. 

However, this is not the proper forum to evaluate whether the previous judge in 

the case or an attorney engaged in any wrongdoing or professional misconduct. 

{¶ 9} In conclusion, “[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. 

{¶ 10} For the reasons stated above, the affidavit of disqualification is 

denied. The case may proceed before Judge Pokorny. 

______________________