COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT
                         COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
                                NO. 70225 
STATE OF OHIO, EX REL.             :
WILLIAM J. NOVAK                   :                              
:            JOURNAL ENTRY
          RELATOR                  :
                                   :            and
     -vs-                          :
                                   :          OPINION
JUDGE RAYMOND PIANKA               :
                                   :
          RESPONDENT               :
                                   :
                                   :
DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT                                          
OF DECISION:                       FEBRUARY 28, 1996
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING:           WRIT OF MANDAMUS
JUDGMENT:                          WRIT DISMISSED
                                   (MOTION #70948)
DATE OF JOURNALIZATION:                                       
APPEARANCES:
FOR RELATOR:                       FOR RESPONDENT:
WILLIAM J. NOVAK, PRO SE           RAMONA L. GERBER, ESQ.
2299 West 11th Street              ASSISTANT LAW DIRECTOR
Cleveland, Ohio  44113             City Hall - Room 106
                                   601 Lakeside Avenue
                                   Cleveland, Ohio  44114  
                               - 2 -
                           JOURNAL ENTRY
    Sua sponte, this  court dismisses the above-captioned  mandamus
action  for failure to state  a claim.   Relator, William J. Novak,
alleges that in the  underlying case, City of Cleveland  v. William
J. Novak,  Cleveland Municipal  Court, Housing  Division, Case  No.
95CRB19316, he has been charged with violating various building and
housing ordinances.  The trial court  set February 22, 1996, as the
trial  date.  On February  2, 1996, Mr. Novak filed  a motion for a
continuance in the  underlying case.  He  asserts that a  ruling on
this motion is necessary to his  defense at trial.  When the  trial
court had not ruled on this motion  by February 16, 1996, Mr. Novak
commenced this  mandamus action  to compel  the judge  to render  a
ruling.
    Mandamus  is  inappropriate  at  this  time, because  there  is
neither the  clear, legal right nor  the clear, legal duty  for the
relief requested.   State ex  rel. Ney v.  Niehaus (1987),  33 Ohio
St.3d 118, 515  N.E.2d 914.  An  inordinate amount of time  has not
elapsed  to  warrant  mandamus.     Rule  6(A)  of  the   Rules  of
Superintendence for Municipal Courts provides that motions shall be
ruled upon within 120 days from the date of filing.  Accordingly, a
mandamus to compel  a ruling  on a  motion which  has been  pending
approximately twenty days is  premature.  State ex rel.  Rodgers v.
Cuyahoga County Court of  Common Pleas (1992), 83 Ohio  App.3d 684,
615 N.E.2d 689;  State ex rel. Richard v. Calabrese (1993), 66 Ohio
St.3d 193, 610  N.E.2d 1002;  State, ex rel. Richard Byrd, v. Judge
                               - 3 -
Norman Fuerst (July 12, 1991), Cuyahoga App. No. 61984, unreported.
    Additionally, Mr.  Novak has failed  to comply with  Local Rule
8(B)(1) which requires that all complaints for special  writs "must
be  supported  by  an  affidavit  from  the  plaintiff  or  relator
specifying the details of the claim."
    Writ denied.  Relator to pay costs
HARPER, J.,       AND
PORTER, J., CONCUR.  
                                       PRESIDING JUDGE
                                            ANN DYKE
.