[Cite as State ex rel. Allen v. Fleegle, 2011-Ohio-5458.]
COURT OF APPEALS
MUSKINGUM COUNTY, OHIO
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
STATE EX REL. JOHN DALE ALLEN JUDGES:
Hon. John W. Wise, P.J.
Petitioner Hon. Julie A. Edwards, J.
Hon. Patricia A. Delaney, J.
v.
Case No. CT2011-0045
MARK C. FLEEGLE, et al.
Respondents OPINION
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Writ of Mandamus
JUDGMENT: Dismissed
DATE OF JUDGMENT ENTRY: October 20, 2011
APPEARANCES:
For Petitioner For Respondents
JOHN DALE ALLEN JUDGE MARK FLEEGLE
c/o 28 North 4th Street 401 Main Street
S.B.4 Zanesville, Ohio 43701
Zanesville, Ohio 43701
Muskingum County, Case No. 2011-0045 2
Wise, P. J.
{¶1} Relator, John Dale Allen, has filed a Petition for Writ of Mandamus
requesting this Court issue a writ ordering Respondents, Judge Mark C. Fleegle and
Judge Jay F. Vinsel, to release Relator from incarceration due to Relator’s medical
condition.
{¶2} Initially, we find Relator has failed to comply with R.C. 2969.25 by not filing
an affidavit detailing his prior civil filings. We will nonetheless address the merits of
Relator’s Petition.
{¶3} “A writ of mandamus will not be issued where there is a plain and
adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law. R.C. 2731.05. A civil rights action
under Section 1983, Title 42, U.S.Code constitutes an adequate legal remedy which
precludes extraordinary relief where state prisoners challenge the conditions of their
confinement and their claims are limited to alleged violation of their federal
constitutional and statutory rights. State ex rel. Carter v. Schotten (1994), 70 Ohio
St.3d 89, 91-92, 637 N.E.2d 306, 309. Section 1983 constitutes an adequate remedy,
since it can provide declaratory, injunctive (both mandatory and prohibitive), and/or
monetary relief. 1 Schwartz & Kirklin, Section 1983 Litigation: Claims, Defenses, and
Fees (2 Ed.1991) 830, Section 16.1.” State ex rel. Peeples v. Anderson (1995), 73
Ohio St.3d 559, 560, 653 N.E.2d 371, 373.
{¶4} “Sua sponte dismissal of a complaint for failure to state a claim upon
which relief can be granted is appropriate if the complaint is frivolous or the claimant
obviously cannot prevail on the facts alleged in the complaint. State ex rel. Bruggeman
Muskingum County, Case No. CT2011-0045 3
v. Ingraham (1999), 87 Ohio St.3d 230, 231, 718 N.E.2d 1285, 1287.” State ex rel.
Kreps v. Christiansen (2000), 88 Ohio St.3d 313, 316, 725 N.E.2d 663, 667.
{¶5} Because it is evident from the Complaint that Relator has or had an
adequate remedy at law by way of a civil rights action under Section 1983, Title 42,
U.S.Code, we will not issue the requested writ of mandamus and dismiss this cause for
failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
By: Wise, P. J.
Edwards and Delaney, JJ., concur.
___________________________________
___________________________________
___________________________________
JUDGES
Muskingum County, Case No. 2011-0045 4
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR MUSKINGUM COUNTY, OHIO
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
STATE EX REL. JOHN DALE ALLEN :
:
Petitioner :
:
v. : JUDGMENT ENTRY
:
MARK C. FLEEGLE, et al. :
:
Respondents : Case No. CT2011-0045
For the reasons stated in our accompanying Memorandum-Opinion, the Petition
for Writ of Mandamus is dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be
granted.
___________________________________
___________________________________
___________________________________
JUDGES