Case No.

______________

Supreme Court
of the State of Ohio
STATE OF OHIO ex rel.
SALVADOR PROPERTIES, LLC,
Relator,

v.

HEATHER S. RUSSELL,
Presiding and Administrative Judge, Hamilton County Municipal Court,
Respondent.

Original Action in Mandamus and Procedendo

RELATOR’S MOTION FOR EXPEDITED SCHEDULING AND CONSIDERATION

OF PETITION FOR EXTRAORDINARY WRIT

Curt C. Hartman (0064242) Joseph T. Deters (0012084)

The Law Firm of Curt C. Hartman Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney
7394 Ridgepoint Drive, Suite 8 James W. Harper (0009872)
Cincinnati, Ohio 45230 Chief Assistant, Civil Division, Office of the
(513) 379-2923 Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney
hartmanlawfirm@fuse.net 230 East Ninth Street, 4th Floor
Cincinnati, OH 45202
Christopher P. Finney (0038998)
(513) 946-3000
Rebecca Heimlich (0064004)
james.harper@hcpro.org
Finney Law Firm LLC
4270 Ivy Point Blvd., Suite 225 Counsel for
Cincinnati, OH 45245 Respondent Heather S. Russell
(513) 943-6655
chris@finneylawfirm.com
rsh@finneylawfirm.com
Counsel for
Relators Salvador Properties, LLC
 SUPREME COURT
OF THE STATE OF OHIO

STATE OF OHIO ex rel. : Case No. ___________

SALVADOR PROPERTIES, LLC, :
:
Relator, :
:
v. :
: RELATOR’S MOTION FOR
HEATHER S. RUSSELL, : EXPEDITED SCHEDULING AND
: CONSIDERATION OF PETITION
Respondent. : FOR EXTRAORDINARY WRIT
:

The STATE OF OHIO, by and on relation to Relator SALVADOR PROPERTIES, LLC,

hereby moves for the expedited scheduling and consideration of this original action for

mandamus and procedendo. This original action arises under the authority of this Court “to

superintend all other inferior tribunals, and therein to enforce the due exercise of those judicial or

ministerial powers with which the [sovereign] or legislature have invested [in such inferior

courts]: and this, not only by restraining their excesses, but also by quickening their negligence,

and obviating their denial of justice.” Ex parte Crane, 30 U.S. 190, 192 (1831).

Due to the failure of the Hamilton County Municipal Court to “provide a summary,

extraordinary, and speedy method for the recovery of possession of real estate” through forcible-

entry-and-detainer actions, State ex rel. Weiss v. Hoover, 84 Ohio St.3d 530, 532, 705 N.E.2d

1227, 1999-Ohio-422, the constitutional and statutory rights of Relator and landlords throughout

Hamilton County are being infringed, resulting in harm and damages on a daily basis,

necessitating the immediate scheduling and consideration of this case.

 “The right of property is a fundamental right, and ‘[t]here can be no doubt that the bundle

of venerable rights associated with property is strongly protected in the Ohio Constitution and

must be trod upon lightly, no matter how great the weight of other forces.’” State ex rel. Doner

v. Zody, 130 Ohio St.3d 446, 958 N.E.2d 1235, 2011-Ohio-6117 ¶52 (quoting Norwood v.

Horney, 110 Ohio St.3d 353, 853 N.E.2d 1115, 2006-Ohio-3799 ¶38)). And in appreciation of

those rights, “[a] forcible entry and detainer action is intended to serve as an expedited

mechanism by which an aggrieved landlord may recover possession of real property.” Miele v.

Ribovich, 90 Ohio St.3d 439, 441, 739 N.E.2d 333, 2000-Ohio-193.

Due to statutory enactments, landlords no longer enjoy their common law right of self-

help to retake possession of leased residential property when the tenants are in breach of their

agreement. Instead, the exclusive remedy upon which landlords must rely is to pursue a forcible-

entry-and-detainer action pursuant to Ohio Rev. Code Chapter 1923. But in appreciation that

landlords of residential rental property cannot retake their property without judicial process, “the

purpose behind forcible entry and detainer…is to provide a summary, extraordinary, and speedy

method for the recovery of possession of real estate.” State ex rel. Weiss v. Hoover, 84 Ohio

St.3d 530, 532, 705 N.E.2d 1227, 1999-Ohio-422.

In the underlying cases giving rise to this original action seeking a writ of mandamus in

or a writ of procedendo, the Hamilton County Municipal Court is denying landlords their right to

a summary, extraordinary, and speedy method for the recovery of possession of the rental

properties. While the hearing on the first cause of action in a forcible-entry-and-detainer, i.e., to

restore possession of the premises, has historically been scheduled and held 15 to 18 days after

the filing of the complaint, said hearings are now being scheduled up to 83 days after the

complaints have been filed. And even beyond the nearly 3-month wait for a hearing just to

-2-
obtain possession of one’s property, hearing dates are being continued at the last minute such

that a further delay occurs. All the while, the tenants are now enabled by the Hamilton County

Municipal Court to continue physical destruction to the leased premises and/or to function as

squatters, all with the tacit approval of the Hamilton County Municipal Court and in derogation

of the constitutional and statutory rights of landlords. Such action and omission by the Hamilton

County Municipal Court has effectively resulted in an unconstitutional taking of the real property

of landlords by the government.

Each day of delay resulting from the failure of the Hamilton County Municipal Court to

provide the summary, extraordinary, and speedy method for the recovery of possession of real

estate through forcible-entry-and-detainer actions results in an on-going infringement of the

landlord’s fundamental rights to property and the incurring of a daily accumulation of damages,

either in lost rents or physical damages to the leased premises.

Time is and continues to be of the essence. In order to protect and vindicate the

fundamental property rights of landlords, and in appreciation that landlords of residential rental

properties must now seek judicial assistance to obtain possession of their property (which is not

occurring in a summary, extraordinary, and speedy method), the immediate intervention and aid

of this Court, in its role of superintending all inferior courts, is critical. Thus, Relator requests

the expedited scheduling and consideration of this original action for mandamus and procedendo.

-3-
 Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Curt C. Hartman

Curt C. Hartman (0064242)
The Law Firm of Curt C. Hartman
7394 Ridgepoint Drive, Suite 8
Cincinnati, OH 45230
(513) 379-2923
hartmanlawfirm@fuse.net
Christopher P. Finney (0038998)
Rebecca Heimlich (0064004)
Finney Law Firm LLC
4270 Ivy Point Blvd., Suite 225
Cincinnati, OH 45245
(513) 943-6655
chris@finneylawfirm.com
rsh@finneylawfirm.com

Attorneys for
Relator Salvador Properties, LLC

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that a true and accurate copy of: (i) the Complaint; and (ii) the Motion for
Expedited Scheduling and Consideration of Petition for Extraordinary Writ, was served upon the
following as statutory legal counsel for the Respondent, via e-mail, on the 1st day of June 2020:

James W. Harper
Chief Assistant, Civil Division,
Office of the Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney
230 East Ninth Street, 4th Floor
Cincinnati, OH 45202
james.harper@hcpro.org

/s/ Curt C. Hartman

-4-