State ex rel. Yost v. Keegan Ents., Ltd., 2026-Ohio-961

The State sued Daniel and DeAnna Keegan, Keegan Enterprises, and Gordon Keegan over accumulated solid waste at their Townsend, Ohio site, alleging open dumping, operating an unlicensed disposal facility, failure to pay response costs, and public nuisance. 1
After a 2023 consent order required removal of about 11 acres of waste by November 30, 2023, the State moved for contempt when appellants allegedly made little or no progress. 2
At the contempt hearings, EPA witness Mary Ann Miller testified the waste had not been removed, while Daniel testified that financial, medical, and equipment problems prevented cleanup. 3
The trial court found appellants in contempt, later imposed purge terms and sanctions, and proceeded to a December 2024 bench trial on the remaining claims. 4
The court ultimately found Daniel, DeAnna, and Keegan Enterprises liable for open dumping and public nuisance, and Daniel and Keegan Enterprises liable for response costs, then ordered cleanup and civil penalties. 5
On appeal, appellants challenged the sufficiency and weight of the evidence, alleged judicial bias from the judge's relationship with Miller, and Daniel claimed due-process error from his medical condition during trial. 6
The court affirmed because appellants failed to provide a complete trial transcript, forfeited the bias claim by not seeking disqualification, and the record showed the trial court halted proceedings when Daniel reported medical issues. 7

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the evidence supported liability and penalties 8	State said appellants failed to include a full trial transcript.	Keegans said the findings lacked proof and were against the manifest weight.	Affirmed; incomplete transcript required presumption of regularity. 9
Whether the judge was biased because of Miller 10	State argued no timely disqualification affidavit was filed.	Keegans claimed favoritism from the judge's familiarity with Miller.	Claim forfeited and unsupported on the merits. 11
Whether Daniel's medical condition denied due process 12	State argued the court stopped trial and furloughed Daniel.	Daniel said he was forced to try the case while impaired.	No due-process violation shown. 13

Knapp v. Edwards Laboratories, 61 Ohio St. 2d 197 (Ohio 1980) (appellant bears the burden to show error by reference to the record 14)
Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., 556 U.S. 868 (U.S. 2009) (due process requires an unconstitutional potential for bias 15)
Jackson v. Cool, 111 F.4th 689 (6th Cir. 2024) (articulates the deep-seated favoritism standard for judicial bias 16)
Coley v. Bagley, 706 F.3d 741 (6th Cir. 2013) (supports the judicial-bias due-process standard 17)