Opinion

State ex rel. Doner v. Zehringer

  • 134 Ohio St. 3d 326
  • 982 N.E.2d 664
  • 2012 Ohio 5637
Court
Ohio Supreme Court
Filed
Dec 5, 2012
Status
Published
On the bench
O'Connor, Pfeifer, O'Donnell, Belfance, Brown, Stratton, Lanzinger, Ninth, Cupp
Cited by
4 cases
Authority
More cited than 69.5%

The opinion

Per Curiam.

{¶ 1} This is an original action by relators, owners of land located downstream from the western spillway of Grand Lake St. Marys, for a writ of mandamus to compel respondents, the Ohio Department of Natural Resources and its director, to initiate appropriation proceedings for the physical taking of their property resulting from flooding caused by a spillway constructed by respondents and the state’s lake-level-management practices. On December 1, 2011, the court granted a writ of mandamus “to compel respondents to commence appropriation proceedings to determine the amount of their taking of the property.” State ex rel. Doner v. Zody, 130 Ohio St.3d 446 , 2011-Ohio-6117 , 958 N.E.2d 1235 , ¶ 86. In a writ issued by the court that same day, respondents were ordered to comply with the court’s order “immediately upon receipt of the writ.”

{¶ 2} Following failed settlement negotiations, the state filed appropriation cases for the property of relators the Doners and the Ebbings. On September 6, 2012, all of the relators with the exception of the Doners and the Ebbings filed a motion for an order for respondents to show cause why they should not be held in contempt of the court’s December 1, 2011 writ of mandamus. We granted the motion and scheduled a show-cause hearing for December 4, 2012.

{¶ 3} Upon considering the parties’ evidence and arguments, we hold that relators have established by the requisite clear and convincing evidence that respondents are in contempt of the court’s December 1, 2011 writ. See Pugh v. Pugh, 15 Ohio St.3d 136, 139, 472 N.E.2d 1085 (1984). We order respondents to complete all appraisals on relators’ parcels for the 2003-flood-level cases within 90 days and to file all appropriation cases for these parcels within 120 days. For the remaining 20 parcels that respondents claim they have not yet surveyed because they involve flooding above the 2003 flood level, respondents are ordered to institute declaratory-judgment actions in the Mercer County Common Pleas Court within 30 days to determine the legal rights of the parties for those parcels. We deny relators’ request for attorney fees and for a fine.

Judgment accordingly.

O’Connor, C.J., and Pfeifer, O’Donnell, Belfance, and McGee Brown, JJ., concur.

Lundberg Stratton and Lanzinger, JJ., dissent.

Eve V. Belfance, J., of the Ninth Appellate District, sitting for Cupp, J.

*328 Vorys, Safer, Seymour and Pease, L.L.P., Bruce L. Ingram, Joseph R. Miller, Thomas H. Fusonie, and Martha C. Brewer, for relators.

Michael DeWine, Attorney General, and William J. Cole, Mindy Worley, Jennifer S. M. Croskey, Michael L. Stokes, Dale T. Vitale, Daniel J. Martin, and Tara L. Paciorek, Assistant Attorneys General, for respondents.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.