State ex rel. Deborah Hoffman has filed a complaint in the Court of Appeals, Ninth Judicial District, County of Summit, against the Akron Municipal Court and its associated judges. The case, dated December 26, 2025, involves Hoffman’s petition for writs of prohibition and mandamus against the court and its judges after a series of legal disputes over jurisdiction and proper legal procedures.
Deborah Hoffman’s legal battle began when she hired an attorney from Munroe Falls to provide expert opinion in a civil suit in Cuyahoga County. Dissatisfied with his services, she refused to pay his final bill. This disagreement escalated when the attorney moved his office to Akron and subsequently filed a small claims action against her in Akron Municipal Court to recover unpaid fees. Hoffman challenged this action by filing for dismissal on grounds of lack of subject matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction, and improper venue since she had no connection with Akron.
The case took a turn when a magistrate ruled that the small claims action should be transferred either to Shaker Heights or Stow Municipal Court due to venue issues. However, all six judges of the Akron Municipal Court recused themselves from the case, leading to its assignment to a retired judge without notifying Hoffman. This judge later ruled in favor of the attorney without informing Hoffman about hearings or trials that led up to this decision.
Hoffman is seeking relief through writs of mandamus and prohibition from the appellate court. She argues that the Akron Municipal Court lacked jurisdiction as she had no ties with Akron and was not served notice for critical hearings or trials. Furthermore, she contends that her consent was necessary before transferring her case to a retired judge under Ohio law. Despite these arguments, the court found no patent lack of jurisdiction on part of respondents since evidence showed some work related to her case was conducted in Akron.
The court dismissed Hoffman’s complaint citing that even if procedural errors occurred during the trial process under Judge Scot A. Stevenson’s purview with Judges Flagg Lanzinger and Hensal concurring; an appeal would have been an adequate remedy rather than extraordinary writs sought by Hoffman.
The attorneys involved include Deborah S. Matz as Director of Law alongside Jacquenette Corgan as Assistant Director representing respondents while Deborah Hoffman represented herself pro se. The Case ID is C.A. No. 31196.
Source: 2025Ohio5772_State_of_Ohio_Ex_Rel_Deborah_Hoffman_v_Akron_Municipal_Court_Opinion_Ohio_Court_of_Appeals.pdf