On Monday, December 2, 2024, Roger D. Ward filed a petition for a writ of mandamus in the Supreme Court of Ohio, seeking to compel Jackson County Common Pleas Judge John T. Wallace to vacate certain judgment entries made in the case of City of Jackson et al. v. Ward. The petition alleges that various judicial decisions made by Wallace violated established laws and the constitutional rights of the relator, Roger D. Ward.

The petition pertains to multiple judgment entries issued by Judge Wallace in 2024 and 2023, specifically dated October 4, September 3, and August 27, as well as entries from November 30, 2023. Ward argues that these decisions were contrary to the Ohio Civil Rules of Procedure and infringed upon his due process rights.

The legal action stems from an incident on January 2, 2023, when Officer Ross conducted a traffic stop on Ward and his wife. Ward claims the stop was illegal, lacking probable cause, and that he was falsely arrested for obstruction of justice when he failed to provide identification. He contends that the traffic stop took place in a private parking lot and that the vehicle was searched without a warrant, violating his rights and leading to the wrongful impoundment of his vehicle.

In his petition, Ward highlights that all charges against him were dismissed by Judge Tyack on June 2, 2023, and an order was issued for the return of his property. However, he alleges that despite following proper legal procedures, he was denied access to his property multiple times, prompting him to file a motion for sanctions against the city police department for non-compliance with the court order.

The petition also references a series of hearings and motions that followed, including a show cause hearing on July 17, 2023, where the police chief allegedly admitted that ownership of the vehicle was not in dispute. Ward claims that during this hearing, the police chief provided false statements regarding the status of the fees related to the impoundment of his vehicle, further compounding the alleged judicial misconduct.

Judge Wallace was assigned to preside over the case in 2024. His handling of the case has come under scrutiny, particularly regarding the declarations made about Ward being a “vexatious litigator.” This designation has significant implications, as it restricts Ward’s ability to file claims without prior court approval.

In the subsequent proceedings, Judge Wallace ruled on motions filed by both parties, including motions to dismiss and requests for admissions. Ward has accused the judge of bias and failing to apply the law equally, which he claims violates his constitutional rights. He argues that the judge’s rulings have not only disregarded established legal precedents but also adversely affected his ability to defend himself.

The petition for a writ of mandamus emphasizes the need for judicial accountability and adherence to legal standards. Ward asserts that the actions taken by Judge Wallace have resulted in significant harm, including loss of property and emotional distress. He seeks to correct what he describes as a miscarriage of justice stemming from the actions of the court.

As this legal battle unfolds, the Supreme Court of Ohio is expected to review the merits of Ward’s petition. The outcome may have broader implications for judicial conduct and the rights of individuals navigating the legal system in Jackson County.

A copy of the original filing can be found here.