On Tuesday, March 4, 2025, Christopher Paul Seelbaugh filed a petition for writ of prohibition in the Supreme Court of Ohio, seeking to restrain Judge Jennifer Petrella from enforcing her recent decisions concerning his legal matters. This petition comes in the wake of a contentious domestic relations case in which Seelbaugh, acting as his own attorney, claims that the court lacked jurisdiction over the issues addressed.
Seelbaugh’s petition alleges that Judge Petrella’s rulings, particularly a decision dated February 3, 2025, were made without proper jurisdiction and violated fundamental procedural requirements. He asserts that the court failed to establish subject matter jurisdiction over trust property related to his case. The petition outlines three principal claims against the judge: failure to establish jurisdiction, violation of substantive due process regarding the assessment of his financial ability to pay child support, and failure to issue required findings of fact and conclusions of law.
In the petition, Seelbaugh requests immediate relief, including a stay of contempt orders previously issued by the court, a declaration that these orders are void, and the transfer of all trust-related matters to a court of proper jurisdiction. He argues that without intervention from the Supreme Court, he faces imminent harm from an unlawful incarceration order.
The legal troubles surrounding Seelbaugh began on January 7, 2022, when proceedings were initiated in the Domestic Relations Court in Montgomery County, Ohio. Following a series of hearings and motions, including a motion for contempt filed by his ex-partner, Brynnae Seelbaugh, the court issued several orders against Christopher Seelbaugh. He claims these orders were enacted without proper legal authority, particularly concerning his rights related to a revocable living trust he manages.
Throughout the proceedings, Seelbaugh has repeatedly challenged the court’s jurisdiction, filing multiple motions to dismiss based on claims of lack of jurisdiction over the trust property. He also contends that the court failed to consider his ability to meet financial obligations before imposing sanctions for unpaid child support. The court’s failure to issue findings of fact and conclusions of law, as required under Ohio Civil Rule 52, is another point of contention highlighted in his petition.
Judge Jennifer Petrella, who presides over the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas, Domestic Relations Division, has been involved in this case as the presiding judge since the initiation of the proceedings. Her rulings have drawn scrutiny, particularly regarding their adherence to established legal standards concerning jurisdiction and due process.
Seelbaugh’s legal actions are part of a broader narrative involving disputes over child support and custody arrangements. He claims that the court’s orders have caused him significant emotional and financial distress, asserting that the rulings threaten his rights as a parent and undermine the established trust arrangements he administers.
In his filings, Seelbaugh has expressed concerns that the court’s actions may violate his constitutional rights, invoking principles of due process that protect individuals from arbitrary legal actions. He has emphasized his commitment to resolving these matters through lawful channels while asserting his rights as a private citizen and trustee.
A copy of the original filing can be found here.
