Patituce v. Hein - Ohio Court of Appeals Opinion
Summary
The Ohio Court of Appeals issued an opinion in Patituce v. Hein, granting a writ of prohibition against Judge Jonathan Hein. The court found that the respondent judge lacked jurisdiction to proceed with a criminal case while a direct appeal was pending, and that the trial court's actions were not in aid of the appeal.
What changed
The Ohio Court of Appeals, in the case of Patituce v. Hein (Docket No. F-25-011), granted a writ of prohibition against Judge Jonathan Hein. The court determined that Judge Hein lacked the necessary jurisdiction to proceed with a criminal case against Joseph Patituce's client, Baylor Barnum, because a direct appeal was already pending. The court found that holding hearings on motions related to the subject of the appeal was not an action taken in aid of the appeal and therefore exceeded the trial court's authority.
This decision has significant implications for trial court jurisdiction once an appeal is filed. Regulated entities, particularly legal professionals and courts, should be aware that trial courts lose jurisdiction over matters that are the subject of an appeal, except for actions taken to aid the appellate process. Failure to adhere to these jurisdictional limitations could result in writs of prohibition being issued, halting proceedings and potentially impacting case outcomes. No specific compliance deadline is mentioned, as this is a judicial ruling on jurisdiction.
What to do next
- Review court orders and pending appeals to ensure no actions are taken that exceed jurisdiction post-appeal.
- Consult legal counsel regarding jurisdictional limitations when an appeal is filed.
Source document (simplified)
Jump To
Top Caption Syllabus Combined Opinion
Support FLP
CourtListener is a project of Free
Law Project, a federally-recognized 501(c)(3) non-profit. Members help support our work and get special access to features.
Please become a member today.
Feb. 27, 2026 Get Citation Alerts Download PDF Add Note
Patituce v. Hein
Ohio Court of Appeals
- Citations: 2026 Ohio 684
- Docket Number: F-25-011
Judges: Mayle
Syllabus
writ of prohibition, judicial power, unauthorized by law, adequate remedy, jurisdiction, affirm, modify, reverse, aid of appeal
Combined Opinion
[Cite as Patituce v. Hein, 2026-Ohio-684.]
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO
SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
FULTON COUNTY
Joseph Patituce Court of Appeals No. F-25-011
Relator
v.
Judge Jonathan P. Hein DECISION AND JUDGMENT
Respondent Decided: February 27, 2026
MAYLE, J.,
{¶ 1} This case is before the court on the November 20, 2025 complaint for an
emergency writ of prohibition filed by relator, Joseph Patituce. Patituce alleges that
respondent, Judge Jonathan Hein, lacks jurisdiction to proceed with a criminal action
pending against Patituce’s client, Baylor Barnum, in the Fulton County Court of
Common Pleas. He seeks a writ of prohibition preventing Judge Hein from proceeding
with Barnum’s case. On January 5, 2026, we issued an alternative writ ordering Judge
Hein to, within 14 days, either file a written notice of his intention to refrain from
proceeding with Barnum’s criminal case while Barnum’s direct appeal is pending or file
an answer or motion to dismiss Patituce’s complaint. Judge Hein did not respond to the
alternative writ.
{¶ 2} After reviewing the matter, we find that Patituce is entitled to a writ of
prohibition. “The purpose of a writ of prohibition is to restrain inferior courts from
exceeding their jurisdiction.” State ex rel. Kerr v. Kelsey, 2019-Ohio-3215, ¶ 5 (6th
Dist.), citing State ex rel. Jones v. Suster, 84 Ohio St.3d 70, 73 (1998). To be entitled to
a writ of prohibition, a relator must establish that “(1) [the respondent] is about to
exercise judicial or quasi-judicial power, (2) the exercise of that power is unauthorized by
law, and (3) denial of the writ will cause injury for which no other adequate remedy in
the ordinary course of law exists.” State ex rel. Henry v. McMonagle, 87 Ohio St.3d 543,
544 (2000). If the respondent patently and unambiguously lacks jurisdiction, the relator
need not demonstrate that he lacks an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law.
State ex rel. Davis v. Kennedy, 2023-Ohio-1593, ¶ 10.
{¶ 3} Once an appeal has been filed, the trial court loses jurisdiction over a case
except to take action in aid of the appeal. In re S.J., 2005-Ohio-3215, ¶ 9. Put another
way, the trial court retains jurisdiction over issues not inconsistent with the appellate
court’s jurisdiction to affirm, modify, or reverse the judgment appealed from. Id.
Holding a hearing on pending motions that address the subject of the appeal is not an
action in aid of the appeal. It is, however, an action that could affect our ability to affirm,
modify, or reverse the trial court order appealed from. See Yee v. Erie Cty. Sheriff’s
Dept., 51 Ohio St.3d 43, 44 (1990) (“[T]he state’s appeal had nothing to do with the
2.
motions . . . . Therefore, had the common pleas court ruled on these motions, it would
not have been acting inconsistently with the court of appeals’ jurisdiction to reverse,
affirm, or modify the trial court’s order . . . .”). Based on the evidence before us, it
appears that Judge Hein is attempting to hold a hearing on an issue involved in a pending
appeal, which he patently and unambiguously lacks jurisdiction to do. Thus, we find that
Patituce is entitled to a writ of prohibition preventing Judge Hein from proceeding with
Barnum’s criminal case, case No. 23 CR 000043, until his direct appeal, case No. F-25-
010, is resolved.
To the clerk: Manner of service.
{¶ 4} The sheriff of Darke County shall immediately serve, upon the respondent
by personal service, a copy of this peremptory writ.
{¶ 5} The clerk is further directed to immediately serve upon all other parties a
copy of this peremptory writ in a manner prescribed by Civ.R. 5(B).
{¶ 6} Costs are taxed to Judge Hein under App.R. 24.
It is so ordered.
Christine E. Mayle, J.
JUDGE
Gene A. Zmuda, J.
JUDGE
Myron C. Duhart, J.
CONCUR. JUDGE
3.
Related changes
Source
Classification
Who this affects
Taxonomy
Browse Categories
Get State Courts alerts
Weekly digest. AI-summarized, no noise.
Free. Unsubscribe anytime.
Get alerts for this source
We'll email you when Ohio Court of Appeals publishes new changes.