Summary of Civil & Appelate Court Cases

Attorneys, Warner Mendenhall & Logan Trombley (https://www.warnermendenhall.com/) 

The History of City Charter Violations by Mayor’s and City Council’s where challenged successfully in the court's!  Thanks to Sally Gaydosh & Attorneys, Warner Mendenhall & Logan Trombley, the People’s Voice has been defended in the Court’s and our Right to Vote have been upheld.  Here is the history of those cases:

Current Case(s): 

• Case No. CV-2025-06-2505 filed June 2, 2025: Judge Joy M. Oldfield.  The defendants, seek an injunction from the Summit County Court to stop the City of Twinsburg (City) from applying funds to the Twinsburg CIC (TCIC) and to declare the TCIC's incorporation to be in violation of the City Charter.  If the Court finds that the TCIC is not allowed by the Charter, then the TCIC would have to be dissolved & its property/assets transferred back to the City.  Second, if the Court finds the TCIC is allowed by the Charter, then the Lawsuit seeks an injunction ordering the City to designate the TCIC as an agent and enter into an agreement with it to draft a development plan and market its properties for the TCIC to be able to continue its present activities under the Downtown Redevelopment Plan.  [Case Summary and Court Documents can be viewed in next section of Current Case Details Below]

Prior Case(s):

• Case No. 96-04-148/CV -04-1678 December 16, 1996:  Judge Murphy The defendants, pursuant to their own Charter, have reserved to the electorate the power to regulate the density of housing within zoning districts Section 7A.01 procedure which have been held by the United States Supreme Court to be valid.

• Case No. CV-2001-10-4962 March 6, 2003: Judge Williams Order this case finds UDC was not properly  passed according to City Charter requirements.

• Case No. CA-21491 APPEAL October 31, 2003:  Donna Carr, Whitemore, J, Batchelder J. CASE No. CV-01-10-4962  involves a dispute over City enforcing two zoning codes at issue in Ordinance 68-2000 Court Finds UDC was not properly enacted.
   
• Case No. CA-21238  April 9, 2004:  Judge Slaby, Judge Baird Ninth District Court of Appeals.  "Gaydosh is entitled to summary judgment for Writ of Mandamus, that Ordinance 38-2002 purports to zone annexed property as I-2 is invalid”. Writ of Mandamus satisfied after "City concedes and reestablished Capital Improvement Board".

• Case No. CA-21238 July 6, 2004:  Judge Slaby, Judge Baird Ninth District Court of Appeals.  City ordered to pay "reasonable compensation to Gaydosh for legal counsel fees in amount of $13,177.50 assessed against City of Twinsburg".

• Case No. CV-2005-03-1931 January 6, 2006:  Judge Spicer ORDER and NOTICE OF PRETRIAL finds "adopting Twinsburg Township's zoning regulation for the Chamberlin property, Section 7A.01 Charter applies and requires the matter to be submitted to voters.

• Case No. CV-2005-03-1931 September 24, 2008: Judge Spicer Ordinance 76-2004 affected a change in the City of Twinsburg's zoning districts, and Section 7A.01 of the City of Twinsburg Charter applies and requires the matter to be submitted to the voters.

• Case No. CV-2012-09-5055 April 9, 2013: Judge Amy Corrigall Jones – upon review and consideration of the Twinsburg Charter and Ordinances, this Court finds that ‘Height Regulations’ falls within Chapter 1141.01. A change in the ‘height regulations’ w3ithout requiring a vote by the electorate is a violation of Charter Section 7A.01 of the City of Twinsburg Charter which reserves to the ‘Voters’ of Twinsburg the final say in legislative zoning power.

• Case No. 5:06-CV-00698-DDD Finch Deposition in Matchouse Vs. City of Twinsburg Lawsuit.  Federal Judge Davd D. Dowd, Jr. Rules against city "City violates Ohio Law and Twinsburg's Charter by imposing zoning restrictions without having first put the restrictions to a vote of the people.
  

 CV = Civil Court     CA-Court of Appeals