The Ohio Court of Appeals recently ruled against George A. Bertalan in a case concerning custody and parenting motions following his divorce. The court denied Bertalan's requests for writs of procedendo and mandamus, which sought to compel Judge Pamela A. Hawkins to rule on various motions related to his children. This decision is significant for Bertalan, as it affects his ability to pursue changes in the custody arrangement established in his divorce.

Bertalan's case stems from a divorce finalized in December 2023, where he and his former spouse agreed on a parenting plan for their children. However, Bertalan later filed multiple motions to modify this plan and address other concerns related to the welfare of his children. The court's ruling means that Bertalan's attempts to expedite these motions have been unsuccessful.

Background

The parties involved in this case are George A. Bertalan and Judge Pamela A. Hawkins of the Cuyahoga County Domestic Relations Court. Bertalan's legal troubles began with his divorce from his former spouse, which was finalized in December 2023. The divorce decree included an agreed parenting plan detailing the rights and responsibilities of both parents regarding their children.

After the divorce, Bertalan filed several motions related to the parenting plan and other aspects of the divorce. These included requests for temporary restraining orders and modifications to the parenting plan. The situation escalated when Bertalan filed a motion to vacate the divorce decree in August 2025, which was denied. He subsequently appealed this decision, leading to further complications in his case.

The Ruling

On June 26, 2026, the Ohio Court of Appeals, led by Judge Michael John Ryan, ruled against Bertalan's requests for writs of procedendo and mandamus. The court found that Bertalan's request was moot because the trial court had already taken action by scheduling hearings to address his pending motions. The court stated, "The record therefore confirms that the respondent judge is acting on the pending motions and that relator has received the relief sought in his petition."

The court also emphasized that a writ of procedendo is appropriate only when a court has refused to enter judgment or has unnecessarily delayed proceeding to judgment. Since the domestic relations court had set a hearing for Bertalan's motions, the court concluded that there was no undue delay, and thus, the writs were denied.

Impact

This ruling has important implications for Bertalan as it affects his ongoing custody and parenting disputes. The court's decision to deny the writs means that Bertalan will have to wait for the scheduled hearings to resolve his motions. This could impact his relationship with his children and his ability to make changes to the parenting plan.

Furthermore, this case highlights the challenges individuals may face when navigating the legal system, especially in family law matters. The court's ruling reinforces the idea that courts will not intervene in cases where the lower courts are actively addressing the issues at hand.

What's Next

While Bertalan's current requests have been denied, the case is not entirely over. The domestic relations court has scheduled hearings for July 13 and 14, 2026, to address Bertalan's pending motions. It remains to be seen how those hearings will unfold and what decisions will be made regarding the custody and welfare of his children.