On Thursday, December 4, 2025, Julia Rielinger asked the Supreme Court of Ohio to issue writs of prohibition and mandamus against Judge Scott Mona of the Cleveland Municipal Court, Housing Division. Rielinger alleges that Judge Mona has been exercising judicial power without proper jurisdiction in four eviction cases: 2025-CVG-002846, 2025-CVG-005572, 2025-CVG-005574, and 2025-CVG-009765.
In her filing, Rielinger claims that Judge Mona’s actions have caused severe monetary and credit harm to her and her former companies, damage she describes as irreparable without the court’s intervention. She contends that the judge has defied the Supreme Court and is about to exercise unauthorized judicial power in a wrongful eviction case where Rielinger is not a tenant and owes no back rent. Instead, she asserts that the landlord owes her $5.4 million.
Rielinger’s request to the Supreme Court seeks to prevent Judge Mona from conducting scheduled second-cause hearings on December 5 and December 15, 2025, and from enforcing any orders, evictions, or judgments issued in the aforementioned cases. She is also asking the court to direct Judge Mona to vacate all orders issued without jurisdiction.
The core of Rielinger’s argument is that the Cleveland Municipal Court lacks both personal and subject-matter jurisdiction in these eviction proceedings. She cites defects such as failure to properly serve statutory agents, suing the wrong legal party, the absence of valid lease agreements, and the issuance of evictions where no rent was owed. She also alleges that the landlord materially breached habitability and suitability standards, wrongfully seized and destroyed her property, and that Judge Mona continued to exercise judicial power despite being notified of a pending writ before the Supreme Court.
Rielinger further claims that Judge Mona adopted magistrate decisions on the same day they were issued, denying the required 14-day objection period, and scheduled second-cause monetary hearings despite the alleged lack of jurisdiction. She argues that these actions warrant a writ of prohibition because the court lacks jurisdiction, is about to exercise judicial power unlawfully, and she lacks an adequate remedy at law.
The filing details specific issues with each of the four eviction cases, including allegations of uninhabitable premises, improper service, and incorrect defendant naming. Rielinger asserts that the landlord owes her millions in damages, negating any basis for eviction or rent collection. She also accuses Judge Mona of violating Civil Rule 53 by immediately adopting magistrate decisions, violating her due process rights by removing her from cases and blocking filings, and defying the Supreme Court’s supervisory authority by issuing a move-out writ after being ordered to respond to her emergency filings.
In addition to the writs of prohibition and mandamus, Rielinger is seeking an emergency writ of mandamus to direct the landlord and moving company to release $800,000 worth of property allegedly seized on November 13, 2025.
A copy of the original filing can be found here.
