2012 Ohio 5637
Ohio2012Background
- Relators own downstream land from Grand Lake St. Marys and seek mandamus to require ODNR to begin eminent-domain proceedings for property taken by flooding from the spillway and lake‑level practices.
- December 1, 2011 writ ordered respondents to commence appropriation proceedings and to comply immediately.
- Appropriation cases were filed for relators’ parcels; most relators were involved except Doners and Ebbings.
- On September 6, 2012 a show‑cause motion for contempt was granted after settlement failed.
- Court found clear and convincing contempt and ordered 90 days for appraisals, 120 days to file appropriation cases for 2003 flood‑level parcels, and 30 days to pursue declaratory actions for the remaining 20 parcels; fees denied.
- Dissent by Lundberg Stratton and Lanzinger.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Contempt standard met for mandamus noncompliance | Relators: clear and convincing proof shows contempt. | ODNR: pace acceptable; no clear violation proven. | Yes, contempt established. |
| Appropriate relief and deadlines for proceedings | Relators sought prompt appropriation and filings. | ODNR argued schedule feasible but not specified. | Court imposed 90/120‑day deadlines and 30‑day declaratory actions. |
| Attorney fees and fines | Relators sought fees as relief for contempt. | Not specified in opinion. | Fees denied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Pugh v. Pugh, 15 Ohio St.3d 136 (Ohio 1984) (clear and convincing standard for civil contempt)
- Brown v. Executive 200, Inc., 64 Ohio St.2d 250 (Ohio 1980) (burden of proof in civil contempt)