State ex rel. Perkins v. Medina Cty. Bd. of Commrs., 2020 Ohio 3913

Curtis Perkins filed a county statutory taxpayer action under R.C. 309.12/309.13 challenging a contract between the Medina County Board (acting as the Solid Waste District board) and Rumpke for facility repairs/operations as unlawful and not competitively bid.
The Board and Rumpke answered and asserted, among other defenses, that Perkins failed to secure costs as required by R.C. 309.13.
Defendants moved for judgment on the pleadings; the trial court granted the motion solely because Perkins had not secured the statutory security for costs, concluding it lacked jurisdiction.
Perkins had paid a $350 filing deposit to the Medina County Clerk (listed on the local fee schedule as a filing fee/"deposit for costs") and argued that payment satisfied the R.C. 309.13 security requirement.
The trial court and this court relied on Ohio precedent holding that posting a filing fee does not necessarily satisfy the statutory security requirement; Perkins never sought a court determination of the required security and did not appeal the trial court's denial of his post-judgment relief motion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether payment of the county clerk filing fee satisfies R.C. 309.13's requirement to "secure the costs" for a statutory taxpayer action	Perkins: the $350 deposit paid under local rule (described as "security for costs") fulfilled R.C. 309.13	Board/Rumpke: the payment was a routine filing fee/deposit and did not constitute the statutory security; taxpayer must secure costs by appropriate procedure	Court: Filing fee did not satisfy R.C. 309.13; Perkins failed to secure costs and thus jurisdiction was lacking
Whether failure to secure costs deprives the court of jurisdiction to adjudicate a statutory taxpayer action	Perkins: compliance with local filing deposit meant jurisdiction existed	Defs.: security is jurisdictional; failure to secure costs converts statutory suit into a non-statutory claim absent compliance	Court: Security for costs is jurisdictional under Ohio law; absence of required security defeated jurisdiction and warranted dismissal
Whether arguments raised for the first time in Perkins' motion for relief from judgment may be considered on appeal	Perkins: raised additional arguments in motion for relief and sought remand	Defs.: issues not raised in opposition to the motion for judgment on the pleadings are forfeited on appeal	Court: Declined to consider new arguments not made in the opposition brief and not included in the appeal from the denial of the relief motion

Whaley v. Franklin Cty. Bd. of Commrs., 92 Ohio St.3d 574 (Civ.R. 12(C) treated as delayed 12(B)(6) motion)
State ex rel. Midwest Pride IV, Inc. v. Pontious, 75 Ohio St.3d 565 (standard for judgment on pleadings; consider complaint and answer)
Peterson v. Teodosio, 34 Ohio St.2d 161 (Civ.R. 12(C) presents only questions of law)
State ex rel. Citizens for a Better Portsmouth v. Sydnor, 61 Ohio St.3d 49 (posting security is jurisdictional for statutory taxpayer suits; filing fee insufficient)
Houghton v. Pethtel, 138 Ohio St. 20 (earlier precedent recognizing jurisdictional nature of security posting)
State ex rel. Commt. for Charter Amendment Petition v. Maple Hts., 140 Ohio St.3d 334 (security need not be posted at filing; post-filing motion may cure jurisdictional defect)
State ex rel. Harris v. Rubino, 155 Ohio St.3d 123 (contemporaneous motion for security and consideration of filing fees may be appropriate)
Fisher v. Cleveland, 109 Ohio St.3d 33 (trial court may, in limited circumstances, sua sponte waive security to cure defect)
Cincinnati ex rel. Ritter v. Cincinnati Reds, L.L.C., 150 Ohio App.3d 728 (taxpayer action is a statutory right requiring security)
Natl. Elec. Contrs. Assn., Inc. v. Mentor, 108 Ohio App.3d 373 (filing fee does not satisfy statutory security requirement)
State ex rel. Portune v. Natl. Football League, 155 Ohio App.3d 314 (discussing predecessor provisions to current statutory security requirements)