State ex rel. Walton v. Hunter, 90-466
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Ohio |
| Writing for the Court | PER CURIAM; MOYER |
| Citation | 559 N.E.2d 1362,53 Ohio St.3d 269 |
| Parties | WALTON, Appellant, v. HUNTER, Judge, Appellee. |
| Docket Number | No. 90-466,90-466 |
| Decision Date | 12 September 1990 |
Page 269
v.
HUNTER, Judge, Appellee.
Decided Sept. 12, 1990.
[559 N.E.2d 1363]
Page 270
Appellant, Frederick Walton, filed a pleading entitled "special demand for common law writ of prohibition" in the Court of Appeals for Wyandot County seeking to prohibit appellee, John G. Hunter, Judge of the Court of Common Pleas of Wyandot County, " * * * and/or unknown such Doe judge, from trespassing upon or doing any act wherein authority lies with the common law court." Appellant's theory for appellee's lack of authority was that Ohio did not become a state in 1803 and that the Northwest Territory Ordinance of 1787 is in effect under which appellee has no jurisdiction. The court of appeals ordered the pleading stricken from its docket.The cause is before this court on appeal as of right.
Frederick W. Walton, pro se.
Charles L. Bartholomew, Pros. Atty., for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
This case was an original action in the court of appeals. Civ.R. 12(F) permits a court to strike insufficient claims. Apparently, the court of appeals felt that such a broad claim was insupportable, and so do we. The Ordinance of 1787 was superseded by the Constitution of the state of Ohio when Ohio was admitted to the Union. Sands v. Manistee River Improvement Co. (1887), 123 U.S. 288, 8 S.Ct. 113, 31 L.Ed. 149; State, ex rel. Donahey, v. Edmondson (1913), 89 Ohio St. 93, 105 N.E. 269, paragraph three of the syllabus. The jurisdiction of appellee's court is thus fixed by Section 4, Article IV of the Constitution, and laws enacted thereunder.
On appeal, appellant challenges the authority of the court of appeals to strike his pleading. We similarly reject this argument. We continue to adhere to the decisions of Sands and Donahey. Under these decisions the appellate court, as well as appellee, has full judicial authority authorized by law.
Accordingly, the judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
MOYER, C.J., and SWEENEY, HOLMES, DOUGLAS, WRIGHT, HERBERT R. BROWN and RESNICK, JJ., concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Neff v. Corrigan, 95-553
...of the appropriate motion, since the question of sufficiency is adequately raised. See, e.g., State ex rel. Walton v. Hunter (1990), 53 Ohio St.3d 269, 559 N.E.2d 1362 (affirmance of Civ.R. 12[F] motion to strike entire pleading based on its insufficiency). However, the better practice is t......
-
Federal Land Bank of Louisville v. William J. Walton, 91-LW-0416
...trial court as existing under the present Ohio Constitution and Laws. The Ohio Supreme Court in State, ex rel. Walton v. Hunter (1990), 53 Ohio St. 3d 269, 270, stated: "The Ordinance of 1787 was superseded by the Constitution of the state of Ohio when Ohio was admitted to the Union. Sands ......
-
Wills J. Walton v. Old Republic Ins. Co., 92-LW-0255
...and the issue was clearly and authoritatively decided adversely to appellant's position in State, ex rel. Walton v. Hunter (1990), 53 Ohio St. 3d 269, 270, wherein the Supreme Court of Ohio held "The Ordinance of 1787 was superseded by the Constitution of the State of Ohio when Ohio was adm......
-
Frederick W. Walton v. John G. Hunter, Et. Al., 91-LW-2688
...is thus fixed by Section 4, Article IV of the Constitution, and laws enacted thereunder.'" State, ex rel. Walton v. Hunter (1990), 53 Ohio St. 3d 269, Second, Appellant claims the trial judge could not dismiss or strike this action because Appellant in his complaint requested a trial by jur......