Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
JON T. HARMON -v- JUDGE EDWARD EMMETT O'FARRELL
Date: 10-20-2019
Case Number: 2019 AP 07 0022
Judge: Craig R. Baldwin
Court: COURT OF APPEALS TUSCARAWAS COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
Plaintiff's Attorney: ROBERT R. STEPHENSON II
Defendant's Attorney:
Description:
On July 18, 2019, Jon Harmon filed a petition for writ of mandamus to
compel Judge Edward E. O’Farrell to continue a hearing the trial court conducted on July
15, 2019. Mr. Harmon further asks this Court to issue a stay to preclude further
garnishment of funds until the trial court conducts a hearing and rules on an accounting.
On July 26, 2019, the Tuscarawas County Prosecutor, on behalf of Judge O’Farrell, filed
a Motion to Dismiss Mr. Harmon’s petition for writ of mandamus. In response, Mr. Harmon
filed a Motion to Quash Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss.
{¶2} Upon review of Mr. Harmon’s petition, we grant the prosecutor’s motion to
dismiss. Mr. Harmon is not entitled to a writ of mandamus because R.C. 2731.04 provides
that an application for writ of mandamus “must be * * * in the name of the state on the
relation of the person applying.” “Thus, a petition for writ of mandamus may be dismissed
for failure to bring the action in the name of the state.” Shoop v. State, 144 Ohio St.3d
374, 2015-Ohio-2068, 43 N.E.3d 432, ¶10, citing Blankenship v. Blackwell, 103 Ohio
St.3d 567, 2004-Ohio-5596, 817 N.E.2d 382, ¶34. Mr. Harmon’s petition was not brought
in the name of the state and therefore, his claim for a writ of mandamus is dismissed.
Call 888-354-4529 if you need a Criminal Defense Attorney in Ohio.
On July 18, 2019, Jon Harmon filed a petition for writ of mandamus to
compel Judge Edward E. O’Farrell to continue a hearing the trial court conducted on July
15, 2019. Mr. Harmon further asks this Court to issue a stay to preclude further
garnishment of funds until the trial court conducts a hearing and rules on an accounting.
On July 26, 2019, the Tuscarawas County Prosecutor, on behalf of Judge O’Farrell, filed
a Motion to Dismiss Mr. Harmon’s petition for writ of mandamus. In response, Mr. Harmon
filed a Motion to Quash Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss.
{¶2} Upon review of Mr. Harmon’s petition, we grant the prosecutor’s motion to
dismiss. Mr. Harmon is not entitled to a writ of mandamus because R.C. 2731.04 provides
that an application for writ of mandamus “must be * * * in the name of the state on the
relation of the person applying.” “Thus, a petition for writ of mandamus may be dismissed
for failure to bring the action in the name of the state.” Shoop v. State, 144 Ohio St.3d
374, 2015-Ohio-2068, 43 N.E.3d 432, ¶10, citing Blankenship v. Blackwell, 103 Ohio
St.3d 567, 2004-Ohio-5596, 817 N.E.2d 382, ¶34. Mr. Harmon’s petition was not brought
in the name of the state and therefore, his claim for a writ of mandamus is dismissed.
Outcome:
The Court also denies Mr. Harmon’s request for a stay and his request to
quash Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss.
quash Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:
About This Case
What was the outcome of JON T. HARMON -v- JUDGE EDWARD EMMETT O'FARRELL?
The outcome was: The Court also denies Mr. Harmon’s request for a stay and his request to quash Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss.
Which court heard JON T. HARMON -v- JUDGE EDWARD EMMETT O'FARRELL?
This case was heard in COURT OF APPEALS TUSCARAWAS COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, OH. The presiding judge was Craig R. Baldwin.
Who were the attorneys in JON T. HARMON -v- JUDGE EDWARD EMMETT O'FARRELL?
Plaintiff's attorney: ROBERT R. STEPHENSON II.
When was JON T. HARMON -v- JUDGE EDWARD EMMETT O'FARRELL decided?
This case was decided on October 20, 2019.