2023 Ohio 826
Ohio Ct. App.2023Background
- TS Tech owns two adjacent properties connected by a private drive that exits onto Taylor Road (the Driveway).
- In 2016 the City approved a permit to widen the Driveway but limited use to emergency access only.
- In 2019 the City approved a Cross-Dock on the Taylor Road parcel but prohibited ingress/egress to Taylor Road; access had to be via the neighboring Jefferson Township property to Broad Street.
- TS Tech sought removal of the emergency-access/use restrictions in a 2021 permit application; the City denied the request and the BZA denied TS Tech’s appeal.
- TS Tech filed a mandamus petition seeking an order compelling the City to initiate appropriation proceedings (claiming a taking via denial of access) while concurrently pursuing an R.C. 2506 administrative appeal; the trial court dismissed the mandamus petition for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
- TS Tech appealed; the appellate court affirmed dismissal, holding the administrative appeal provides an adequate remedy and mandamus must await a final administrative decision.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether mandamus to compel appropriation proceedings was properly dismissed | Mandamus is required now because the administrative appeal cannot compensate for past and ongoing denial of access (a taking) | The R.C. 2506 administrative appeal is an adequate remedy; TS Tech must exhaust that remedy before seeking mandamus | Dismissal affirmed: mandamus is premature because relief depends on outcome of the administrative appeal; exhaustion required |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Levin v. City of Sheffield Lake, 70 Ohio St.3d 104 (Ohio 1994) (mandamus to compel appropriation requires a clear legal duty and no adequate remedy at law)
- State ex rel. Heath v. State Medical Board of Ohio, 64 Ohio St.3d 186 (Ohio 1992) (standard for mandamus: clear legal duty and lack of adequate remedy)
- Eggers v. Morr, 162 Ohio St. 521 (Ohio 1955) (if an appeal is provided, an independent equity action addressing the same grounds is generally barred)
- State ex rel. Sibarco Corp. v. Hicks, 177 Ohio St. 81 (Ohio 1964) (availability of statutory appeal precludes other equitable relief)
- State ex rel. Dynamic Industries, Inc. v. Cincinnati, 147 Ohio St.3d 422 (Ohio 2016) (takings claim in mandamus must await a final administrative decision)