COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT 
                       COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA 
                            NO. 71730
STATE OF OHIO, EX REL.        :
JUDITH BRATTON                :
        Relator               :     PETITION FOR WRIT OF 
                              :        MANDAMUS
     -vs-                     : 
                              :
TIMOTHY MCGINTY               :
                              : 
        Respondent            :
                              :
DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT          :       
  OF DECISION                 :       JANUARY 13, 1997        
JUDGMENT                      :    DISMISSED.
DATE OF JOURNALIZATION        :                        
APPEARANCES:
For relator:                  For respondent:
Judith Bratton                Stephanie Tubbs Jones
541 Grace Avenue              Cuyahoga County Prosecutor
Akron, Ohio 44320             The Justice Center
                              1200 Ontario Street
                              Cleveland, Ohio  44113  
                              - 2 -
On December 11,  1996, the relator, Judith  Bratton, commenced this
mandamus action  to compel Judge  McGinty "to place  in the  file a
judgment he  made on the common pleas case."  Ms. Bratton captioned
her  mandamus pleading as Judith Bratton  v. Cleveland Plain Dealer
and attached a  copy of the  docket in the underlying  case, Judith
Bratton v.  Cleveland  Plain Dealer,  Cuyahoga Cty.  C.P. Case  No.
303441.  She included  no other attachments or affidavits,  nor did
she offer further averments or explanations.
     A review of the  docket reveals that on November 12, 1996, Ms.
Bratton filed a notice  of appeal in the underlying  case, Cuyahoga
County Court of Appeals  Case No. 71583.  However,  the trial court
did not enter judgment for the  defendants until November 14, 1996.
Accordingly, this court concludes that the November 14 order is the
judgment which  Ms. Bratton seeks the  trial judge to  place in the
file.   This court  further notes  that on  December 11,  1996, Ms.
Bratton filed  another notice  of appeal  in  the underlying  case,
Cuyahoga County Court of Appeals Case  No. 71731.  Attached to  the
docketing statement and  praecipe filed in that  case is a copy  of
the trial court's November 14,  1996 order granting the defendants'
motion for summary judgment.  Therefore, the trial court has placed
the  requested judgment in  the file of  the underlying  case.  The
relator has  received the  relief she  specifically requested,  and
                              - 3 -
this case is moot. 
     To the extent that the relator was really trying to compel the
trial court  to place  other records,  such as  filings, briefs  or
evidence, into  the case file,  she has  an adequate remedy  at law
through App. R.  9(E).  State  ex rel. Hester  v. Crush (1996),  75
Ohio St.3d  563, 664  N.E.2d  930; State  ex  rel. Fant  v.  Trumbo
(1986), 22 Ohio  St.3d 207, 489 N.E.2d 1316.   App.R. 9(E) provides
in pertinent part:  "the court of appeals, on proper  suggestion or
of its own initiative, may direct that the omission or misstatement
be  corrected,  and  if necessary  that  a  supplemental  record be
certified and transmitted.  All other questions as to the form  and
content of the record  shall be presented to the court of appeals."
Thus,  because  mandamus  will not  issue  if  the  relator has  an
adequate remedy  at law, mandamus  will not issue  in this case  to
compel the trial court to place other filings in the record.  
     This court further  notes that  mandamus actions are  separate
actions governed by the  Rules of Civil Procedure.   Thus, pursuant
to Civ.R.  10(A) and  17, the  trial court  was the  properly named
defendant or respondent in  the mandamus action, not the  defendant
in the underlying  case.   Moreover, Local  Appellate Rule  8(B)(1)
requires that the relator in a  complaint for an extraordinary writ
must  state the specific  facts upon which  the claim is  based and
must support the complaint with an affidavit specifying the details
of the claim.   
                              - 4 -
     Accordingly,  this  court  sua  sponte  dismisses  the  above-
captioned action for mandamus.  Relator to pay costs.
PATRICIA A. BLACKMON, J., CONCURS
                              ____________________________________
                              JAMES D. SWEENEY, CHIEF JUSTICE
.