COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO  EIGHTH DISTRICT
                       COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
                            NO. 80785
STATE OF OHIO, EX REL.        :       ORIGINAL ACTION
MICHAEL E. BAUR               :
                              :
               Relator        :         JOURNAL ENTRY
                              :
     vs.                      :             and
                              :
BROOKLYN MUNICIPAL COURT      :           OPINION
                              :
                              :
               Respondent     :
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING:           WRIT OF PROCEDENDO
                                   (Motion No. 35884)
JUDGMENT:                          WRIT DENIED. MOTION FOR
                                   SUMMARY JUDGMENT GRANTED.
DATE OF JOURNALIZATION:            March 21, 2002
APPEARANCES:
For Relator:                       MICHAEL E. BAUR, Pro Se
                                   Inmate No. A407-122
                                   Richland Correctional Inst.
                                   P.O. Box 8107
                                   Mansfield, Ohio 44901
For Respondent:                    THOMAS O. SHAPER, ESQ.
                                   Brooklyn City Law Director
                                   7619 Memphis Avenue
                                   Brooklyn, Ohio 44144
COLLEEN CONWAY COONEY, J.:
     On January 23, 2002, the relator, Michael Baur, commenced this
procedendo action against the respondent, the Brooklyn  Municipal
Court, to  compel the court  to try him  or otherwise proceed  to
judgment in the underlying case, City of Brooklyn v. Michael Baur,
                               -2-
Brooklyn Mayor's Court, Case No. 46671-D, Citation No. A 2552.  In
the  underlying   case,   the  city   charged  him   with   petty
theft/shoplifting.  He is now in prison pursuant to his conviction
for receiving stolen  property, and he  requested that the  court
proceed to judgment.   However, there has  been no action in  the
underlying case.
     On February  14,  2002,  the respondent  moved  for  summary
judgment on the grounds of mootness because the City of  Brooklyn
dismissed the  petty theft/shoplifting charge.   Attached to  the
summary judgment motion is a dismissal entry supporting the motion.
Baur has not filed any response to this dispositive motion.  This
court grants the respondent's motion for summary judgment and rules
that this procedendo  action is moot.   The City of Brooklyn  has
dismissed the  charge and  will not  proceed against  Baur.   The
application for a writ of procedendo is denied.  Each side  shall
bear its own  costs.   The clerk is  directed to  serve upon  the
parties notice of  this judgment and its  date of entry upon  the
journal.  Civ.R. 58(B).
                                      COLLEEN CONWAY COONEY
                                              JUDGE
KENNETH A. ROCCO, P.J. CONCURS
ANN DYKE, J. CONCURS
 
 
 
.