COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT
                        COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
                            NO. 81886
IN THE MATTER OF:               :
          C.F.                  :
                                :       PETITION FOR WRIT OF
          Petitioner            :
                                :          HABEAS CORPUS
     vs.                        :
                                :
THE CUYAHOGA COUNTY             :
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN/            :
CHILDRENS SERVICE, ET AL.       :
                                :
          Respondent            :
DATE OF JOURNALIZATION:                JANUARY 27, 2003
JUDGMENT:                       DISMISSED.
APPEARANCES:
For relator:                    C. F., Pro Se
                                4085 East 64th Street
                                Cleveland, Ohio 44105
For respondent:                 WILLIAM D. MASON
                                Cuyahoga County Prosecutor
                                JOSEPH C. YOUNG
                                Assistant Prosecuting Attorney
                                3343 Community College Avenue
                                Corridor F
                                Cleveland, Ohio 44115
                                GREGORY S. MILLAS
                                Assistant County Prosecutor
                                C.C.D.F.S.
                                3955 Euclid Avenue
                                Cleveland, Ohio 44115
                                -2-
PATRICIA ANN BLACKMON, J.:
     Petitioner, the mother of three dependant children, has filed
a petition for a writ of habeas corpus and named the Cuyahoga
County Department of Children's and Family Services ("the County"),
as the respondent.  The County has filed a motion to dismiss which
we grant for the following reasons.
     On December 19, 2001, the Cuyahoga County Court of Common
Pleas,  Juvenile  Division,   awarded  permanent  custody   of  the
petitioner's three children to the County.    No direct appeal was
filed by the petitioner from the permanent award of custody to the
County.  On October 10, 2002, the petitioner commenced her action
for a writ of habeas corpus.  On October 21, 2002, the County filed
a motion to dismiss.
     In Howard v. Catholic Social Services of Cuyahoga County,
Inc., 70 Ohio St.3d 141, 1994-Ohio-219, 637 N.E.2d. 890, the
Supreme Court of Ohio examined the applicability of habeas corpus
in a child custody case.  The Supreme Court of Ohio held that:
     "Pursuant to R.C. 2725.05, this court has generally limited
issuance of the writ in order to preclude nonjurisdictional
challenges. Flora v. Rogers (1993), 67 Ohio St.3d 441, 619 N.E.2d
690; State ex rel. Dotson v. Rogers (1993), 66 Ohio St.3d 25, 607
N.E.2d 453.  In addition to such criminal cases, we have applied
R.C. 2725.05 in habeas corpus cases that arose in the civil context
as well.  See, e.g., In re Frinzl (1949), 152 Ohio St. 164, 30 O.O.
456, 87 N.E.2d 583, paragraph three of the syllabus, applying the
                                -3-
similarly worded statutory predecessor to R.C. 2725.05 to a child
custody case; see also, Children's Home of Marion Cty. V. Fetter
(1914), 90 Ohio St.110, 106 N.E. 761; In re Gatti (Oct. 16, 1990),
Seneca App. No. 13-90-16, unreported, 1990 WL 157235;    Morton v.
Ewers (Oct. 15, 1982), Monroe App. 567, unreported, 1982 WL 6200.
`A writ of habeas corpus will lie in child custody matters if the
custody  order  in   dispute  was  entered  by a court without
jurisdiction, thus being void ab initio.' Beard v. Williams Cty.
Dept. Of Social Serv. (1984), 12 Ohio St.3d 40, 41, 12 OBR 35, 36,
465 N.E.2d 397, 399; cf. Reynolds v. Ross Cty. Children's Serv.
Agency (1983), 5 Ohio St.3d 27, 5 OBR 87, 448 N.E.2d 816." Howard
v. Catholic Social Services of Cuyahoga County, Inc., supra, 145.
     It must also be noted that habeas corpus is an extraordinary
remedy and is not available when there exists a remedy in the
ordinary course of the law.   Habeas corpus may not be used as a
substitute for a direct appeal. Luchene v. Wagner (1984), 12 Ohio
St.3d 37; 465 N.E.2d 395; In re Piazza (1966), 7 Ohio St.2d 102,
218 N.E.2d 459.
     In the case sub judice, the juvenile court possessed the
necessary basic jurisdiction to determine whether the petitioner's
three children were dependant.   See. R.C. 2151.23(A)(1).   We
further find that the petitioner possessed an adequate remedy at
law through a direct appeal from the judgment of the juvenile court
which awarded permanent custody of her three children to the
County.  As previously stated, habeas corpus is an extraordinary
                               -4-
remedy and may not be used as a substitute for an appeal.   McNeal
v. Miami Cty. Children's Serv. Bd. (1992), 64 Ohio St.3d 208, 594
N.E.2d 587. In re Davis (1985), 18 Ohio St.3d 226, 480 N.E.2d 775.
Finally, we find that the petitioner has failed to cite any extreme
circumstances which would require this court to issue a writ of
habeas corpus.  Absent specific claims of ineffective assistance of
trial counsel and a demonstration of the claimed deficiencies, we
find that the bare allegation of a denial of due process does not
invoke the extraordinary circumstances necessary for this court to
issue a writ of habeas corpus.  Cf.   McGinty v. Jewish Children's
Bur. (1989), 46 Ohio St.3d 159, 545 N.E.2d 1272; State ex rel.
Pirman, supra, In re Fisher (1974), 39 Ohio St.2d 71, 313 N.E.2d
851; In re Brown (1973), 35 Ohio St.2d 9, 298 N.E.2d 579.
     Accordingly, we grant the County's motion to dismiss.   Costs
to petitioner.  It is further ordered that the Clerk of the Eighth
District Court of Appeals shall serve notice of this judgment upon
all parties as required by Civ.R. 58(B).
     Petition dismissed.
KENNETH A. ROCCO, P.J., and
ANNE L. KILBANE, J., CONCUR.
                                      PATRICIA ANN BLACKMON
                                              JUDGE
 
.