[Cite as Beverly v. Clancy,
2021-Ohio-3104.]
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO
EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
WILLIAM CREAD BEVERLY, :
Relator, :
No. 110554
v. :
JUDGE MAUREEN CLANCY, ET AL., :
Respondents. :
JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
JUDGMENT: COMPLAINT DISMISSED
DATED: September 3, 2021
Writ of Mandamus
Motion No. 547561
Order No. 548645
Appearances:
William Cread Beverly, pro se.
Michael C. O’Malley, Cuyahoga County Prosecuting
Attorney, and Kelli Kay Perk, Assistant Prosecuting
Attorney, for respondents.
LARRY A. JONES, SR., P.J.:
William Cread Beverly, the relator, has filed a complaint for a writ of
mandamus. Judge Maureen Clancy and Magistrate Gina Lunsford, the
respondents, have filed a Civ.R. 12(B)(6) motion to dismiss that is granted for the
following reasons.
Initially, we find that the complaint for a writ of mandamus is
procedurally defective because it is improperly captioned. Beverly styled this action
as “William Cread Beverly -vs- Judge Maureen Clancy, and Magistrate Lunsford.”
Pursuant to R.C. 2731.04, a complaint for a writ of mandamus must be brought in
the name of the state on relation of the applying person. Rust v. Lucas Cty. Bd. of
Elections, 108 Ohio St.3d 139,
2005-Ohio-5795,
841 N.E.2d 766; State ex rel. Simms
v. Sutula,
81 Ohio St.3d 110,
689 N.E.2d 564 (1998); Maloney v. Court of Common
Pleas of Allen Cty.,
173 Ohio St. 226,
181 N.E.2d 270 (1962).
In addition, Beverly has failed to comply with Civ.R. 10(A), which
requires that the complaint must include the addresses of all parties. Lucas v. Gaul,
8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 108082, 2019-Ohio-2449; Spann v. Calabrese, 8th Dist.
Cuyahoga No. 108290,
2019-Ohio-1660; Bandy v. Villanueva, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga
No. 96866,
2011-Ohio-4831.
Finally, the complaint for a writ of mandamus fails to state a claim
upon which relief can be granted. In order for this court to issue a writ of
mandamus, Beverly must demonstrate: (1) that Beverly possesses a clear legal right
to the relief prayed for, (2) that Judge Clancy and Magistrate Lunsford possess a
clear legal duty to perform the requested acts, and (3) that there exists no plain and
adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law. State ex rel. Berger v.
McMonagle, 6 Ohio St.3d 28,
451 N.E.2d 225 (1983); State ex rel. Westchester v.
Bacon,
61 Ohio St.2d 42,
399 N.E.2d 81 (1980); State ex rel. Heller, v. Miller,
61
Ohio St.2d 6,
399 N.E.2d 66 (1980); State ex rel. Harris v. Rhodes,
54 Ohio St.2d
41,
374 N.E.2d 641 (1978)
A thorough review of the complaint for mandamus fails to reveal that
Beverly has established a clear legal right or that Judge Clancy and Magistrate
Lunsford possess any legal duty that must be enforced. In addition, mandamus
cannot be employed to control judicial discretion or substitute for an appeal. State
ex rel. Dreamer v. Mason, 115 Ohio St.3d 190,
2007-Ohio-4789,
874 N.E.2d 510;
State ex rel. Woods v. Gagliardo,
49 Ohio St.2d 196,
360 N.E.2d 705 (1977). Beverly
has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and dismissal is
appropriate pursuant to Civ.R. 12(B)(6). State ex rel. Russell v. Thornton,
111 Ohio
St.3d 409,
2006-Ohio-5858,
856 N.E.2d 966.
Accordingly, we grant the joint Civ.R. 12(B)(6) motion to dismiss.
Costs to Beverly. The court directs the clerk of courts to serve all parties with notice
of this judgment and the date of entry upon the journal as required by Civ.R. 58(B).
Complaint dismissed.
_______________________________
LARRY A. JONES, SR., PRESIDING JUDGE
KATHLEEN ANN KEOUGH, J., and
EILEEN A. GALLAGHER, J., CONCUR
