COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT
			COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
			    NO. 71731
JUDITH BRATTON,               :
                              :
       Plaintiff-Appellant    :         JOURNAL ENTRY
                              :               and
     vs.                      :             OPINION
                              :
CLEVELAND PLAIN DEALER,       :
ET AL.,                       :
                              :
       Defendants-Appellees   :
DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT
OF DECISION                   :    SEPTEMBER 18, 1997
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING:      :    Civil appeal from
                              :    Common Pleas Court
                              :    Case No. 303441
JUDGMENT                      :    AFFIRMED.
DATE OF JOURNALIZATION        :
APPEARANCES:
For plaintiff-appellant:      Judith L. Bratton, Pro Se
                              541 Grace Avenue
                              Akron, Ohio 44320
For defendants-appellees:     David L. Marburger
                              Lisa Hammond Johnson
                              Laurel E. Queeno
                              BAKER & HOSTETLER
                              3200 National City Center
                              1900 East Ninth Street
                              Cleveland, Ohio 44114-3485
                                2
NAHRA, J.:
     Appellant, Judith Bratton ( Bratton ), appeals from the trial
court's grant  of  summary judgment  in  favor of  appellees  The
Cleveland Plain  Dealer  and Ted  Wendling.   For  the  following
reasons, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
     The Plain Dealer published an article written by Ted Wendling
entitled  Akron  woman legend  at playing the  race card.     The
article, part  of a series on  the Ohio Civil Rights  Commission,
detailed the history of Judith Laverne Jones.  Allegedly, Jones has
filed thirteen racial discrimination charges and fourteen federal
civil rights lawsuits  against various entities since 1990.   The
article   provided  additional   information   regarding   Jones'
psychological profile and arrest record.  Bratton filed the instant
lawsuit, alleged that her maiden name was Judith Laverne Jones, and
claimed that the article libeled her.
     After filing her lawsuit, appellant moved to have the  trial
judge  disqualified for  bias.    Pursuant to  R.C.  2701.03,  an
affidavit of prejudice  was forwarded to the Ohio Supreme  Court.
The Ohio Supreme  Court reviewed the matter and denied  Bratton's
application.
     Upon motion  of appellees, the  trial court granted  summary
judgment.  Appellant timely appealed and assigned two errors  for
review.
                                3
                               I.
     Appellant's first assignment of error contends that the trial
court erred by failing to issue an opinion detailing the facts or
law supporting its judgment.  As we stated in Hinkle v. Norfolk and
Western Railway  Co. (July 18,  1996), Cuyahoga  App. No.  69815,
unreported, at 3:
     [T]his court should make clear  * * * that there is  no
     requirement the  trial court make  findings of fact  or
     conclusions of law when ruling on a motion for  summary
     judgment.  Sawchyn v. Westerhaus (1991), 72 Ohio App.3d
     25.
Accordingly, appellant's first assignment of error is overruled.
                               II.
     Appellant's second assignment of error contends that the trial
judge erred  by failing  to recuse  himself.   However, the  Ohio
Supreme Court ruled:
     The allegations  do  not  support a  finding  of  bias,
     prejudice,   or   interest.       The   affidavit    of
     disqualification is found not well-taken and is denied.
This decision is  conclusive and we  are without jurisdiction  to
review the merits of the Ohio Supreme Court's decision.  State v.
Durr (Aug. 25, 1994), Cuyahoga App. No. 65958, unreported.   See,
also,  Jones v. Billingham  (1995), 105 Ohio  App.3d 8, 11  (R.C.
2701.03 provides exclusive means by which a litigant may claim that
a common pleas  judge is prejudiced); Kondrat v. Ralph  Ingersoll
Pub.  Co. (1989), 56 Ohio App.3d 173 (appellate court is  without
jurisdiction to review Ohio Supreme Court's decision on issue  of
disqualification).   Appellant's  second assignment  of error  is
overruled.
                                4
     Judgment affirmed.
                                5
     It is ordered that appellees recover of appellant their costs
herein taxed.
     The court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal.
     It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this court
directing  the Common  Pleas Court  to carry  this judgment  into
execution.
     A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the  mandate
pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.
MATIA, DAVID T., P.J., and
O'DONNELL, J., CONCUR.
                                     JOSEPH J. NAHRA
                                           JUDGE
N.B.  This entry is an announcement of the court's decision.  See
App.R. 22(B), 22(D) and 26(A); Loc.App.R. 27.  This decision will
be journalized and will become the judgment and order of the court
pursuant to App.R.22(E) unless a motion for reconsideration  with
supporting brief, per App.R. 26(A), is filed within ten (10) days
of the announcement of the court's decision.  The time period for
review by the Supreme Court of  Ohio shall begin to run upon  the
journalization of  this court's announcement  of decision by  the
.