State ex rel. Grove v. Nadel

Grove asserts that the court of appeals erred in granting Judge Nadel’s second motion to dismiss because it was contrary to this court’s mandate and his trial court transmitted the wrong transcript in his appeal of right. For the following reasons, however, Grove’s claims lack merit.

First, the court correctly dismissed Grove’s procedendo action on remand from this court because Judge Nadel had already performed the requested act, ie., he journalized his January 1997 decision denying Grove’s motion for a copy of his transcript. Neither procedendo nor mandamus will compel the performance of a…