High court to decide if Cleveland must refund $4.1M in traffic camera tickets

COLUMBUS — Although Clevelanders voted for city officials to banish automated traffic cameras from the streets in 2014, the city’s use of them over a decade ago was debated in the Ohio Supreme Court on Tuesday.

At issue is whether the city needs to refund drivers $4.1 million that they paid in tickets between 2005 and 2009, and an additional $1.8 million in interest for allegedly wrongly withholding the ticket money.

The drivers, part of a class-action lawsuit, were lessees, renters of cars or operating vehicles owned by their employers. The city at the time thought that the drivers would be liable for committing speeding or redlight offenses, as drivers who own their vehicles are. But a 2009 Ohio Eight District Court of Appeals decision determined they were not liable for the tickets.

At the Ohio Supreme Court on Tuesday, Gary Singletary, the city’s chief attorney, argued that Cleveland does not need to refund the drivers the ticket money because they paid their $100 tickets to the city and did not appeal their tickets to Common Pleas court.

There is legal precedent to back his position that the drivers should have appealed to the Common Pleas court, with courts over the years ruling that such an appeal is required in class action suits, he said.

“They admitted liability by paying the civil citation, without engaging in the administrative appeal that was available to them,” Singletary said.

Justice Jennifer Brunner asked Singletary how easy it would be for an ordinary citizen to appeal over a $100 traffic ticket.

Singletary provided an example of someone who appealed his ticket and was successful.

“The initial appeal on this matter is free,” he said.

Paul Flowers, who is representing the drivers, argued that going to Common Pleas court to argue fine points of law is not practical. One driver, an attorney, spent two years appealing his ticket, he said.

“It was very rigorously contested by the city’s attorneys,” he said. “You can’t do one of these without a lawyer, which by itself is going to cost thousands of dollars. That’s money you’re not going to get back. If you win, maybe you don’t have to pay your ticket. But you still have to pay your lawyer.”

This is not the first time the Ohio Supreme Court has seen the case as it’s been litigated over the years. Different aspects of it have been appealed over the years to the high court, sometimes resulting in oral arguments and decisions, and other times justices declining to hear the case.

After the 2009 ruling in the Eighth District ruling that lessees, renters and employees of company-owned cars are not liable for tickets, the city broadened its ordinance to include them as liable for camera-generated tickets. But in 2014, Cleveland voters amended the city’s charter to get rid of the cameras altogether.

The Ohio Supreme Court’s decision will likely end the case. The ruling will come out in the next several months.