# State Ex Rel. City of Cleveland v. Sutula

> Ohio Supreme Court · October 21, 2010 · 127 Ohio St. 3d 131

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9801836

## Case

- **Full name:** The State Ex Rel. City of Cleveland, Appellant, v. Sutula, Judge, Appellee
- **Court:** Ohio Supreme Court
- **Decided:** October 21, 2010
- **Citations:** 127 Ohio St. 3d 131; 2010 Ohio 5039
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Brown
- **Judges:** Pfeifer, Stratton, O'Connor, O'Donnell, Lanzinger, Cupp, Brown
- **Cited by:** 26 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9801836

## Opinion text

Brown, C.J.,
dissenting.
{¶ 26} Absent a patent and unambiguous lack of jurisdiction, a court having general subject-matter jurisdiction over an action possesses the legal authority to determine its own jurisdiction. Whitehall ex rel. Wolfe v. Ohio Civ. Rights Comm. (1995), 74 Ohio St.3d 120, 123-124 , 656 N.E.2d 684 . Like the appellate court, I cannot conclude based on the record before us that the common pleas court patently and unambiguously lacks jurisdiction. State ex rel. Cleveland v. Sutula, Cuyahoga App. No. 94264, 2010-Ohio-914 , 2010 WL 877517 , ¶ 27. Accordingly, I dissent.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9801836. Public record. Not legal advice.