State ex rel. Doner v. Zehringer

2012 Ohio 5637, 982 N.E.2d 664, 134 Ohio St. 3d 326
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedDecember 5, 2012
Docket2009-1292
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 2012 Ohio 5637 (State ex rel. Doner v. Zehringer) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State ex rel. Doner v. Zehringer, 2012 Ohio 5637, 982 N.E.2d 664, 134 Ohio St. 3d 326 (Ohio 2012).

Opinions

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]*328Vorys, 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.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Kelley v. Kelley
2022 Ohio 4306 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2022)
M.W. v. K.M.
2019 Ohio 5364 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2019)
State ex rel. Karr Revocable Trust v. Zehringer
2014 Ohio 2241 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2014)
State ex rel. Doner v. Zehringer (Slip Opinion)
2014 Ohio 2102 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2014)
State ex rel. Doner v. Zehringer
2012 Ohio 5637 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2012 Ohio 5637, 982 N.E.2d 664, 134 Ohio St. 3d 326, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-doner-v-zehringer-ohio-2012.