Cleveland v. Paramount Land Holdings, L.L.C.
2011 Ohio 5382
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Paramount failed to appear at arraignments for four City of Cleveland health-code violations, though duly served.
- Trial court moved cases to corporate docket and held show cause hearings; Paramount again did not appear.
- Court found Paramount in indirect civil contempt and imposed $1,000 per diem sanctions per property to coerce attendance.
- Paramount eventually appeared and pleaded not guilty, later changing to no contest; the court sentenced fines totaling over $1.1 million.
- Appellate decision reversed due to Crim.R. 11 deficiencies; Paramount moved to vacate $112,000 in contempt fines, which the trial court denied.
- This appeal challenges the due process, the size of the fines, and the applicability of the Eighth Amendment to civil contempt.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Due process in contempt sanctions | Paramount argues no hearing before the contempt finding. | City contends civil contempt with notice satisfied due process. | No abuse of discretion; due process satisfied. |
| Excessive fines for contempt | Fine amount per diem per property was excessive under RC 2705.05. | Court may impose punitive civil contempt fines to coerce attendance. | Fines upheld; within inherent court power. |
| Eighth Amendment excessiveness | Per diem fines violate the Excessive Fines Clause. | Civil contempt fines do not trigger the Eighth Amendment. | Eighth Amendment not implicated; affirmed civil contempt sanctions. |
Key Cases Cited
- Cincinnati v. Cincinnati Dist. Council 51, 35 Ohio St.2d 197 (1973) (inherent power to punish for contempt generally not subject to legislative control)
- Call v. G.M. Sader Excavating & Paving, Inc., 68 Ohio App.2d 41 (1980) (upholding fine amount despite challenges to statutory limits)
- Olmsted Twp v. Riolo, No. 54004 (1988) (upholding substantial fines for injunction violations)
- State v. Kilbane, 61 Ohio St.2d 201 (1980) (dicta reaffirming court’s contempt authority)
- State v. Local Union 5760, 172 Ohio St. 75 (1961) (contempt power generally not limited by legislative authority)