State ex rel. Crenshaw v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Elections

Citations

• 2024 Ohio 1478

Syllabus

Mandamus Civ.R. 12(B)(6) motion to dismiss R.C. 733.49 Cleveland City Charter Sections 70 and 77 declaratory judgment prohibitory injunction election vs. appointment of Cleveland law director Loc.App.R. 45(C) – filing fee or poverty affidavit. The requisites for mandamus are well established: (1) the relator possesses a clear legal right to the requested relief (2) the respondent possesses a clear legal duty to perform the requested relief and (3) there exists no other adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law. Herein, we find that the relator has failed to establish, by clear and convincing evidence, that a conflict actually exists between R.C. 733.49 and Sections 70 and 77 of the Cleveland City Charter with regard to the appointment versus the election of the Cleveland law director. Of greater significance is the fact that the relator seeks a declaratory judgment that R.C. 733.49 supersedes the Cleveland City Charter, which requires the election of the Cleveland law director and prevents the appointment of the Cleveland law director. A complaint couched in the form of mandamus does not state a cause of action in mandamus when the clear substance of the allegations demonstrates an action for declaratory judgment and prohibitory injunction. A declaratory judgment action that is cloaked in mandamus is subject to dismissal, because the court of appeals lacks jurisdiction to hear declaratory judgment actions. Finally, the relator has failed to pay the filing fee to initiate this action or file an affidavit of indigence as required by Loc.App.R. 45(C). Failure to pay the filing fee or provide an affidavit of indigence constitutes grounds for dismissal.