The commission works with state lawmakers to update court rules involving evidence and for cases in various judicial divisions - criminal, civil, juvenile, traffic, and appellate.

The commission works with state lawmakers to update court rules involving evidence and for cases in various judicial divisions - criminal, civil, juvenile, traffic, and appellate.

Editor’s Note: This story is part of a series on the Supreme Court of Ohio boards and commissions.

Rules are meant to be followed. But as times change, rules do too. In the legal profession, certain people are responsible for revising the rules to keep up with the times.

Retired northeast Ohio attorney Frank Osborne was one such person. His relationship with the legal profession’s rules is different than most, beginning with his time as a law clerk in the early 70’s.

“I got really interested in them as a law clerk under Judge John V. Corrigan,” said Osborne.

Judge Corrigan, who served on the trial and appellate bench in Cuyahoga County for 42 years, was a central figure in the state’s history regarding Ohio court rules. In 1970, as chair of the Ohio Judicial Conference’s Rules Advisory Committee, Judge Corrigan helped reform the state’s judicial system. Under his guidance, the committee altered how changes to court operations could be made, switching from a structure that relied on laws enacted by the legislature to one in which the Supreme Court of Ohio could create and amend rules for the judicial branch.

It was at this time that Judge Corrigan took enthusiastic attorney in Osborne under his wing, piquing an interest in rules and rule-making.

“I’ve been following both to this day.” Osborne said.

Creation of Commissions
Osborne’s association with judicial guidelines and how they’re developed would come full circle more than 30 years later.

One of the direct results of his and the Rules Advisory Committee’s work was the Supreme Court’s ability to develop standards – with the assistance of volunteer judges, lawyers, and other legal professionals – on how state courts should function. Many of these groups are known as commissions.

In 2007, Osborne was appointed as a counsel to the civil rules committee of the Supreme Court’s Commission on the Rules of Practice and Procedure. The commission assists the Court in adopting and amending rules involving evidence and for cases in various judicial divisions – criminal, civil, juvenile, traffic, and appellate.
“To sit in that room and observe the expertise and professionalism is one of the most rewarding experiences for an attorney,” Osborne said.

Unlike the Supreme Court’s other boards and commissions, which can change rules with the Court’s approval alone, amendments to the Rules of Practice and Procedure also must be reviewed by the General Assembly.

“A big difference with this commission is that we have a lot of strict constitutional deadlines, and we can only change these rules once a year,” said Jesse Mosser, the Court’s legislative counsel.

Just like Judge Corrigan and the Rules Advisory Committee years earlier, this group of judges and lawyers work with state lawmakers to enact systemic change.

Recent rule changes recommended by the commission include magistrates being given the authority to preside over a specialized docket and the requirement that oral arguments in the state’s 12 appellate districts be recorded and available to the public.

Proposal Protocols
While clerking under Judge Corrigan, Osborne gained insight about the collaborations and processes necessary to review and revise court guidelines.

The Commission on the Rules of Practice and Procedure has constitutional mandates – found in Article IV, Section 5(B) of the Ohio Constitution – specific to filing these rule amendments: Any recommended changes must be approved by the Supreme Court and submitted to the General Assembly by Jan. 15 each year. Also, any revisions to the proposals must be finalized by May 1. Unless the General Assembly disapproves, the reforms go into effect on July 1.

To adhere to those deadlines, the commission begins formulating proposed amendments a year or two ahead of submitting them to the state legislators.

“This is when the commission members are all asking, ‘What needs to be changed and how are we going to do it?’” Osborne said.

In the fall, the commission presents formal suggestions to the Court for review. The recommendations are also made available for public comment. The commission then tweaks its amendments based on feedback before the Court submits the initial filing with the General Assembly by Jan. 15. After another round of consideration by the Court and the public, the commission presents its final draft of the rule changes by May 1. 

“We have six or seven meetings throughout the year and work throughout the summer to get the agenda,” said Michel Jendretzky, Supreme Court legal counsel and commission liaison.

Committees of Collaboration
When Osborne was approached to join the commission as a counsel, civil rules committee chair Susan Becker reached out to him. She was a law professor at Cleveland-Marshall College of Law. He had taught an Ohio civil procedure course at the school as an adjunct professor for more than a decade.

“Being an instructor really helped me communicate the intricacies of civil procedure to those who didn’t understand all of it,” said Osborne.

That experience was beneficial when he was later appointed as a full member of the commission, which consists of legal minds from various personal and professional backgrounds. The 20 members consist of nine judges, one magistrate, five attorneys, two law school faculty, a prosecutor or law director, a criminal defense lawyer, and a court administrator.

Each commissioner serves on a committee dedicated to an area of law that typically aligns with a person’s expertise. For Osborne, it was civil procedure. Other committees include evidence, traffic, criminal, civil, juvenile, and appellate. The traffic rules committee has additional representatives from the Ohio State Highway Patrol, Department of Public Safety, and the Ohio State Bar Association.

The committees do most of the work about a particular idea and then present new or amended rules the commission, explaining the reasoning behind the proposal. With the variety of perspectives, the ensuing discussions become a sounding board for all the stakeholders.

For Osborne, whose 12-year tenure with the commission concluded in 2019, the meetings were a return to his legal roots with Judge Corrigan, increasing his legal acumen about rules, how they work, and how they can be made better.
“No matter the legal background of each individual, the overall approach for every member is what’s best for Ohio’s court system,” said Osborne.

Service on the Commission on the Rules of Practice and Procedure is one of the many ways an attorney can give back to the profession. The Commission on the Rules of Practice and Procedure, like other boards and commissions, has a need for volunteers to share in maintaining the integrity of the profession. The justices of the Supreme Court of Ohio appoint the members of the board and are always grateful for applications from those willing to serve.