Court Opinion

ID: 9896213
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-09 19:09:24.502548+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:14:22.002251
License: Public Domain

[Cite as R.C.H. v. Russo, 2023-Ohio-4065.]

                              COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO

                             EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
                                COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA

R.C.H.,                                            :

                Relator,                           :
                                                              No. 113098
                v.                                 :

JUDGE JOHN J. RUSSO,                               :

                Respondent.                        :

                               JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION

                JUDGMENT: COMPLAINT DISMISSED
                DATED: November 3, 2023

                                         Writ of Procedendo
                                         Motion No. 569058
                                         Order No. 569133

                                             Appearances:

                R.C.H., pro se.

                Michael C. O’Malley, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting
                Attorney, and James E. Moss, Assistant Prosecuting
                Attorney, for respondent.

EILEEN T. GALLAGHER, J.:

                On August 17, 2023, the relator, R.C.H. commenced this procedendo

action to compel the respondent judge to issue a final ruling on the relator’s motion
for expungement of criminal record that he filed on April 6, 2023, in the underlying

case, State v. R.C.H., Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR-12-568211-A.1 On October 30, 2023,

the respondent judge moved for summary judgment on the grounds of mootness.

Attached to the dispositive motion is a copy of the judge’s October 26, 2023

judgment entry in which the respondent noted that he had heard the application for

expungement and granted the motion. This journal entry establishes beyond doubt

that the respondent judge has proceeded to judgment on the subject motion and that

this case is moot.

             Accordingly, this court grants the respondent judge’s motion for

summary judgment and dismisses this application for procedendo action as moot.

Respondent to pay costs; costs waived. This court directs the clerk of courts to serve

all parties notice of the judgment and its date of entry upon the journal as required

by Civ.R. 58(B).

             Writ dismissed.

_________________________
EILEEN T. GALLAGHER, JUDGE

ANITA LASTER MAYS, A.J., and
MICHAEL JOHN RYAN, J., CONCUR

      1   The relator named Judge Dick Ambrose as the respondent. However, he has
retired, and Judge John J. Russo now presides over the case. Pursuant to Civ.R. 21, this
court substitutes Judge John J. Russo as the proper respondent.