Champaign Cty. Court of Common Pleas v. Fansler
2016 Ohio 228
Ohio Ct. App.2016Background
- Jeanine Fansler worked ~15 years as a court reporter for the Champaign County Common Pleas Court; after Judge Wilson retired, Judge Selvaggio became judge and Fansler’s contract was terminated July 24, 2013.
- The court changed its transcript page rates effective August 13, 2013 (lowering rates); Fansler demanded $8/page for transcripts and withheld notes/recordings after her termination until paid at that rate.
- Multiple parties requested transcripts (Pasko, Cook, Ward); the court ordered Fansler to produce transcripts and to return all paper notes and electronic recordings by March 31, 2014; Fansler repeatedly resisted, citing unpaid prior transcripts, her independent-contractor status, and lack of equipment while in California.
- Judge Selvaggio filed a contempt complaint after Fansler failed to comply; a visiting judge heard the matter (Selvaggio recused) and found Fansler guilty of criminal and civil contempt for disobeying six court orders.
- Fansler appealed, raising four assignments: improper service/notice of orders, improper caption/plaintiff (court named as plaintiff), judge signing the complaint (alleged unauthorized practice of law), and challenge to contempt findings.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed: actual knowledge sufficed for notice; naming the court and Judge Selvaggio’s filing were permissible in a contempt special proceeding; contempt findings were not an abuse of discretion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Notice/service of contempt orders | Court: contempt requires notice; actual knowledge suffices | Fansler: orders weren’t served under Civ.R. 4.1, so contempt was premature | Actual knowledge of the orders satisfied notice; assignment overruled |
| Caption/plaintiff in contempt filing | Court: contempt is a special proceeding; naming court vindicates public interest | Fansler: no statute authorizes common pleas court to be plaintiff; improper form | Naming the court as nominal plaintiff is immaterial in contempt proceeding; assignment overruled |
| Judge signing/filed complaint (R.C. 2301.22) | Court: judge initiated contempt to protect court’s authority, not as counsel | Fansler: judge acted as attorney/advocate for court, unauthorized practice | Judge’s filing notified of contempt charges and did not constitute forbidden advocacy; assignment overruled |
| Merits of contempt findings | Court: R.C. 2705.02 allows contempt for disobedience of court orders; court-set transcript rates and custody rules control | Fansler: entitled to $8/page; notes/recordings belong to her as independent contractor; lacked equipment/appointment | Orders were lawful (court sets reporter compensation; notes must be filed/preserved); Fansler disobeyed and no valid defense shown; contempt affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Denovchek v. Bd. of Trumbull Cty. Commrs., 36 Ohio St.3d 14 (1988) (contempt is a special proceeding to protect court dignity and administration of justice)
- City of Cincinnati v. Cincinnati Dist. Council 51, Am. Fedn. of State, Cty. & Mun. Emp., AFL-CIO, 35 Ohio St.2d 197 (1973) (written notice in contempt proceedings functions like a complaint to apprise accused of charges)
- Windham Bank v. Tomaszczyk, 27 Ohio St.2d 55 (1971) (quoted authority on purpose of contempt proceedings)
- In re Davis, 77 Ohio App.3d 257 (2d Dist.) (1991) (contempt proceeding entitles accused to adversary rights: notice and opportunity to present evidence)
- State ex rel. Cincinnati Enquirer v. Hunter, 138 Ohio St.3d 51 (2013) (appellate review of contempt uses abuse-of-discretion standard)