Court Opinion

ID: 9393792
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-11 14:06:17.037154+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:55.373644
License: Public Domain

[Cite as Turner v. Turner, 2023-Ohio-1576.]

                              COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO

                             EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
                                COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA

JEFFREY F. TURNER, SR.,                             :

                Relator,                            :
                                                               No. 112663
                v.                                  :

NINA TURNER,                                        :

                Respondent.                         :

                               JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION

                JUDGMENT: WRIT DENIED
                DATED: May 5, 2023

                                          Writ of Certiorari
                                          Order No. 564096

                                              Appearances:

                Jeffrey F. Turner, Sr., pro se.

MARY J. BOYLE, J.:

                On April 28, 2023, Jeffrey F. Turner, Sr. commenced an action he

termed a writ of certiorari relating to the underlying case, Turner v. Turner,

Cuyahoga D.R. No. DR-22-388761. For the following reasons, this court dismisses

this writ action, sua sponte.
               First, the Ohio Constitution, Article IV, Section 3(B), vests the court

of appeals with jurisdiction over only the following five writs: quo warranto,

mandamus, habeas corpus, prohibition, and procedendo. As a corollary, this court

does not have jurisdiction to adjudicate a writ of certiorari.

               Turner did not caption his case. The failure to caption a writ case

creates uncertainty as to the identity of the respondent and to the nature of the relief

sought. This court has held that this deficiency alone also warrants dismissal. State

ex rel. Calloway v. Court of Common Pleas of Cuyahoga Cty., 8th Dist. Cuyahoga

No. 71699, 1997 Ohio App. LEXIS 79452 (Feb. 27, 1997); Jordan v. Cuyahoga Cty.

Court of Common Pleas, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 96013, 2011-Ohio-1813.

               Moreover, it is difficult to discern what relief Turner is seeking: Does

he want this court to review the entire underlying case, does he want a review of the

November 7, 2022 hearing; does he want an order for the judge to proceed pursuant

to the judicial canons; does he want proper service for hearings; does he want this

court to vacate an order related to the November 7, 2022 hearing; does he want an

investigation into the judge’s conduct; or something else. “If a relator has failed to

present clearly the claims asserted and the relief requested, this court may enter

judgment against the relator.” State v. Byrge, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 92979, 2009-

Ohio-4376, ¶ 2, and State v. Wynn, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 105205, 2017-Ohio-659.

               Accordingly, this court dismisses Turner’s application for a writ of

mandamus. Jeffrey F. Turner Sr. to pay costs. 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.

MARY J. BOYLE, JUDGE

EILEEN A. GALLAGHER, P.J., and
MICHELLE J. SHEEHAN, J., CONCUR