In Inside Courts, retired judge Tom Hodson explains the complexities of the law and legal cases, helping you understand what’s at stake — and how it affects you.
There is so much going on in our local courts, it is difficult to keep up.
I had intended for this column to just focus on the case or cases involving Judge Patrick Lang and the form of Nelsonville government.
However, two cases we have been following for the City of Athens have had activity that needs to be explained. I will try to break down what is going on in each case and translate the legalese into understandable bites.
Flooding of QuidelOrtho facility at 2025 E. State St.
East State St. Development Co. filed a lawsuit Sept. 20, 2024, against multiple defendants, including the Chauncey-Dover Volunteer Fire Department, the Waterloo Township Fire Department, The Plains Volunteer Fire Department, and the City of Athens Fire Department.
Plaintiff claimed that these multiple fire departments, while conducting training exercises near plaintiff’s property leased to QuidelOrtho, caused water pipes to burst within the facility causing major damage.
Plaintiff is seeking more than $700,000. The case is scheduled to go to trial July 14, 2026.
The fire departments don’t want that to happen and collectively Nov. 24, they filed a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, which asks the court to dismiss the plaintiff’s case against them before trial.
“Judgment on the pleadings” means that the court should decide the case based on the documents filed and the legal memoranda and arguments citing other cases as precedent.
Each side gets an opportunity to file legal memoranda (arguments) with the court before the judge decides the motion.
East State St. Development has until Dec. 22 to respond in writing to the defendants’ motion and arguments.
In their motion, the fire departments claim they should win the case because of the concept of sovereign immunity. Simply put, sovereign immunity is an ancient legal concept that the king can do no wrong and therefore cannot be sued for any damage he did.
In modern days, sovereign immunity is applied to governments — federal, state, and local under certain specific circumstances.
The fire departments, in their memorandum of law, state that they should be protected by sovereign immunity for four reasons:
- Fire departments and volunteers/employees are given broad immunity under Ohio’s Political Subdivision Tort Liability Act (RC 2744.02 F).
- There are no exceptions to the immunity available to the plaintiff.
- Even if the court found a viable exception, immunity is reinstated because the training was not reckless.
- The exceptions to immunity do not cover trespass which is alleged by the plaintiff.
The firefighters claim that state law, R.C. Chapter 2744, outlines a three-step analysis to determine whether immunity is in play.
Step one says that political subdivisions are immune from liability for acts connected with governmental functions.
Defendants argue that fire departments and firefights are employees of political subdivisions and therefore, are protected. They also claim that training exercises fall within a protected class of activities by governments.
The second step is to determine if any of the five statutory exceptions to immunity apply. Defendants argue they do not.
The firefighters claim they were not reckless and that they were engaged in a governmental function.
“This immunity applies unless there is evidence of willful, wanton, or reckless conduct,” they say in their memorandum
Step three means that even if the court did find an exception, it would be negated. The memorandum stated:
“Under R.C. 2744.03 (A)(3), a political subdivision is immune from liability if the loss of property resulted from the exercise of judgment or discretion in use of equipment, supplies, materials, personnel, facilities and other resources. Only if the exercise of judgment or discretion in the use of resources was exercised with malicious purposes, in bad faith, or in wanton or reckless manner can a political subdivision be held liable…”
The fire departments say they did not act maliciously, in bad faith or in a wanton or reckless manner.
In addition to acting negligently, East State St. Development claims that firefighters trespassed on its property and caused damages. The fire departments argue that trespass is not covered by any of the immunity exceptions and therefore, immunity holds against any allegation of trespass.
We now await the written rebuttal arguments of East State St. Development. I have only outlined the arguments of the firefighters.
Athens County Common Pleas Judge George McCarthy will make his decision after reviewing the legal arguments and the other legal documents already filed in the case.
Cyber heist
In November 2024, the City of Athens was bilked out of nearly $722,000 by cyber scammers. A month later, Athens filed a lawsuit against unknown thieves and the Republic Bank and Trust of Louisville, where Athens deposited the money for the thieves to withdraw.
Later, it was found that another company, Regency Centers L.P., was swindled out of a large sum of money at about the same time and by the same or similar thieves. Regency Centers joined the lawsuit.
Some money was left in the account that the scammers used and there has been an ongoing battle as to whether Athens or Regency Centers should receive all or a portion of the money as partial restitution.
To date, the scammers have not been caught or criminally charged.
The attorneys for all the parties held a telephonic status conference Sept. 25 with Common Pleas Judge George McCarthy and scheduled another conference for Feb. 19, 2026.
However, all the parties in the case filed a Joint Motion for Referral to Mediation Oct. 16. Judge McCarthy signed an order the next day, sending the case to private mediation to be completed by Feb. 19, 2026.
The parties will agree upon a private mediator who will meet with the parties to attempt to resolve the matter by a settlement prior to more formal activity in the case.
The parties will split the cost of the mediation.
Mediation is an often-used manner of resolving cases and allows the parties to negotiate a resolution without the formal rules of court proceedings, such as the Rules of Evidence.
In this case, the Court has given a firm Feb. 19 deadline to either resolve the matter privately or come back to the court for more formal procedures leading to a trial.
City of Nelsonville
After the Ohio Supreme Court twice refused to decide whether the charter government should continue or be replaced by a statutory form of government, the competing parties turned to trial courts trying to resolve the issue.
Nelsonville resident and city auditor statutory candidate Andrea Nicole Thompson Hashman filed a complaint in the Athens County Common Pleas Court for a Declaratory Judgment Sept. 29.
She asked the court to rule unconstitutional the City Council’s Ordinance 54–25 repealing the voter referendum 23 which eliminated Nelsonville’s charter form of government.
She also moved the Court for a preliminary injunction to “grant a Preliminary Injunction holding that Issue 23 is a lawful initiative exercising the Constitutional right of the people of Nelsonville to abolish their City Charter and is not subject to repeal pursuant to Article X §10.06 of the Nelsonville City Charter enabling Ordinance 54–25 or any other act of repeal or invalidation pursuant to the Nelsonville City Charter until further order of the Court.”
The City of Nelsonville objected strongly to the request for a preliminary injunction.
Prior to the election, Judge Patrick Lang issued a decision Oct. 23 and ordered denying the preliminary injunction.
The election went forward in November with candidates for both the charter and the statutory form of government being elected.
Meanwhile, the parties keep clashing on matters regarding this case. They have fought over whether an affidavit of a witness should be stricken from the record. That motion was filed by the plaintiff on October 30.
Judge Lang denied the plaintiff’s motion to strike the affidavit of City Auditor Nicholas Smith Dec. 1, and made the affidavit part of the case record.
Another motion is still pending before Judge Lang. The defendants filed a Motion for Judgment on the Pleading Oct. 22, arguing that Hashman did not have proper standing to bring her lawsuit and that her claims are barred by several other legal precedents.
Plaintiff filed a legal memorandum Nov. 4, countering defendants’ arguments and Nov. 17, the defendants filed a reply memorandum.
That motion is still pending, and we await Judge Lang’s ruling.
A ruling in favor of the motion for judgment on the pleadings would end the case. A ruling denying the motion would mean that the case would proceed towards a trial.
Meanwhile, three days after the November election, Nelsonville filed another lawsuit, this time in the Franklin County Common Pleas Court asking that court to prohibit the certification of the “statutory candidates” elected on the November ballot.
That case, however, was voluntarily dismissed by Nelsonville without any further action.
So where do we stand on which government will take over come Jan. 1 – the charter or the statutory?
We still do not know and there may be more litigation to come before that question is answered.
Stay tuned.
Let us know what's happening in your neck of the woods!
Get in touch and share a story!
