 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
In re J.L.11/17/2005
v. Dorsky (Dec. 10, 1981), Cuyahoga App. No. 43587, 1981 Ohio App. LEXIS 14072, at *8-9. In the case at bar, the father failed to timely raise any objection to the appointment of the visiting judge by the magistrate. Rather, he waited until the court's decision was adverse to him and then questioned the authority of the court.
{ } We agree with the analysis of the Twelfth Appellate District in Williams v. Banner Buick, Inc. (1989), 60 Ohio App. 3d 128, 134 when it said: "Clearly, the decision by the [appellants] to proceed without challenge or objection concerning the appointment of [the visiting judge] renders any possible error waived. In addition, the acting judge, by having 'colorable' authority, is deemed a de facto judge with all the power and authority of a proper de jure judge. Consequently, actions taken by [the visiting judge] are legally valid and binding." Id.
{ } "A delegation of judicial authority under color of right may allow the person to whom the judicial authority is transferred to act as a de facto judge, even if the delegation of authority is defective." Cangemi v. Cangemi, Cuyahoga App. No. 84678, 2005-Ohio-772 . It is long-standing law that "as much as we deprecate the irregular way in which the substitute for the regularly elected judge assumed the functions of the judge in this case, the record shows some color of title to appointment as substitute, and he was a de facto acting * judge, and the judgment, if any, entered by him, is not now open to attack on that ground." Demereaux v. State (1930), 35 Ohio App. 418, 422. Because the father failed to object to the appointment of the visiting judge prior to his appeal, he cannot now complain about the manner in which that judge was appointed.
{ } Because the father did not object to the judge's authority to hear the case at the trial level, and he has failed to follow the proper channels for objecting in this court, this assignment of error is without merit.
Affirmed.
It is ordered that appellee recover of appellant its costs herein taxed.
The court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal. It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this court directing the Juvenile Court to carry this judgment into execution.
A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.
COLLEEN CONWAY COONEY, J., CONCURS.
PATRICIA A. BLACKMON, A.J., DISSENTS WITHOUT OPINION.
DIANE KARPINSKI JUDGE
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Ohio DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|