[Cite as State ex rel. Buoscio v. DeWeese, 2011-Ohio-598.]
COURT OF APPEALS
RICHLAND COUNTY, OHIO
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
STATE OF OHIO, EX REL., JUDGES:
SAMUEL L. BUOSCIO Hon. William B. Hoffman, P.J.
Hon. Sheila G. Farmer, J.
Relator Hon. John W. Wise, J.
-vs-
JUDGE JAMES DEWEESE Case No. 10-CA-128
Respondent OPINION
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Writ of Mandamus
JUDGMENT: Dismissed
DATE OF JUDGMENT ENTRY: February 9, 2011
APPEARANCES:
For Petitioner For Respondent
SAMUEL L. BUOSCIO NO APPEARANCE
North Central Correctional Institution
670 Marion williams Port Rd.
Marion, OH 43302
Richland County, Case No. 10-CA-128 2
Farmer, J.
{¶1} Relator, Samuel L. Buoscio, has filed a Petition for Writ of Mandamus
against Judge James DeWeese.
{¶2} Pursuant to R.C. 2323.52, Relator has been declared to be a
vexatious litigator in Case Number CV 2006-05-3153 in the Summit County Court of
Common Pleas and in Case Number 03-CVH-12-13184 in the Franklin County Court of
Common Pleas.
{¶3} R.C. 2323.52 governs vexatious litigators. Section R.C. 2323.52(D)(3)
relates to cases filed by a vexatious litigator in a court of appeals and provides,
{¶4} “(3) A person who is subject to an order entered pursuant to division (D)(1)
of this section may not institute legal proceedings in a court of appeals, continue any
legal proceedings that the vexatious litigator had instituted in a court of appeals prior to
entry of the order, or make any application, other than the application for leave to
proceed allowed by division (F)(2) of this section, in any legal proceedings instituted by
the vexatious litigator or another person in a court of appeals without first obtaining
leave of the court of appeals to proceed pursuant to division (F)(2) of this section.”
{¶5} R.C. 2323.52(F)(2) prohibits Relator from filing anything in the court of
appeals except an application for leave. This section provides in part,
{¶6} “(2) A person who is subject to an order entered pursuant to division (D)(1)
of this section and who seeks to institute or continue any legal proceedings in a court of
appeals or to make an application, other than an application for leave to proceed under
division (F)(2) of this section, in any legal proceedings in a court of appeals shall file an
Richland County, Case No. 10-CA-128 3
application for leave to proceed in the court of appeals in which the legal proceedings
would be instituted or are pending. . .” R.C. § 2323.52.
{¶7} The order entered by the Summit County Court of Common Pleas is an
order entered pursuant to R.C. 2323.52(D)(1) which provides,
{¶8} “(D)(1) If the person alleged to be a vexatious litigator is found to be a
vexatious litigator, subject to division (D)(2) of this section, the court of common pleas
may enter an order prohibiting the vexatious litigator from doing one or more of the
following without first obtaining the leave of that court to proceed:
{¶9} (a) Instituting legal proceedings in the court of claims or in a court of
common pleas, municipal court, or county court;
{¶10} (b) Continuing any legal proceedings that the vexatious litigator had
instituted in any of the courts specified in division (D)(1)(a) of this section prior to the
entry of the order;
{¶11} (c) Making any application, other than an application for leave to proceed
under division (F)(1) of this section, in any legal proceedings instituted by the vexatious
litigator or another person in any of the courts specified in division (D)(1)(a) of this
section.”
{¶12} R.C. § 2323.52.The Summit County Court of Common Pleas order mirrors
the language of R.C. 2323.52(D)(1) and is an order issued pursuant to R.C.
2323.52(D)(1). Because Relator is subject to an order issued pursuant to section
(D)(1), he is prohibited by sections (D)(3) and (F)(2) from filing anything other than an
application for leave.
Richland County, Case No. 10-CA-128 4
{¶13} Relator did not first seek leave to file the instant cause of action, therefore,
this cause is dismissed. All motions filed by Relator are denied.
{¶14} CAUSE DISMISSED.
{¶15} COSTS TO RELATOR.
{¶16} IT IS SO ORDERED.
By Farmer, J.
Hoffman, P.J. and
Wise, J. concur.
_s/ Sheila G. Farmer__________________
_s/ William B. Hoffman________________
_s/ John W. Wise____________________
JUDGES
SGF/as 113
Richland County, Case No. 10-CA-128 5
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR RICHLAND COUNTY, OHIO
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
STATE OF OHIO, EX REL. :
SAMUEL L. BUOSCIO :
:
Relator :
:
-vs- : JUDGMENT ENTRY
:
JUDGE JAMES DEWEESE :
:
Respondent : Case No. 10-CA-128
For the reasons stated in our accompanying Memorandum-Opinion, the Petition
for Writ of Mandamus is dismissed. Costs to Relator.
_s/ Sheila G. Farmer__________________
_s/ William B. Hoffman________________
_s/ John W. Wise____________________
JUDGES