A Shaker Square-area landlord says Cleveland Housing Court has gone too far in telling corporate property owners what to do after they’re found guilty of breaking housing codes.
The landlord, Shaker Heights Apartments Owner LLC, made the argument while appealing a sentence in a misdemeanor housing case. The landlord has also been fighting a lawsuit from the City of Cleveland since 2023. That suit is now on hold while appeals move forward.
It’s not uncommon for Judge W. Moná Scott to order landlords to fix up their properties, pay delinquent taxes and test rentals for lead paint after a conviction. Sometimes, she’ll ban a landlord from selling property without the court’s approval.
The judge does it by sentencing landlords to probation, also known as community control. It’s a way for the court to keep tabs on a property for years.
Attorneys for the landlord say Scott overstepped her authority in her probation order. They filed their arguments with Ohio’s Eighth District Court of Appeals.
“This is yet another case that concerns the Trial Court’s unbridled use of purported community control sanctions and examines their unwarranted nature and indiscriminate application,” the landlord’s lawyers wrote in a July court filing.
While judges routinely sentence individual people to jail time or probation, the landlord’s attorneys argued that housing court can’t do that to companies. As a limited liability company, the landlord can only be fined, they wrote.
They also argued that when a city building inspector examined one of the buildings’ elevators, it amounted to a warrantless search.
Lawyers for the city have until Aug. 11 to file their response to the appeal.
The landlord owns a set of apartment towers on Shaker Boulevard just west of Shaker Square. The appeal stems from a 2023 criminal case for failing to comply with elevator maintenance violations.
Shaker Heights Apartments Owner LLC pleaded no contest to the charges. Earlier this year, Scott sentenced the company to three years of probation. She ordered the landlord not to sell the property without her approval. She also told the owner to set aside tenants’ rent payments to finance repairs.
Several defendants have appealed housing court’s community control orders, recent appellate decisions show. Sometimes the appeals court agreed with Scott and sometimes it sided with the defendant. In one decision last year, the appeals court overturned a probation order prohibiting an LLC landlord from selling properties it owned in the city.
Cleveland’s lawsuit delayed again
The appeals have put on hold the city’s years-long lawsuit over the conditions in the landlord’s properties. Cleveland originally sued in March 2023, accusing the landlord of “negligent management” amid outcry from tenants and public officials.
The landlord’s lawyers have said that the company has invested time and money hiring contractors to fix up the building and resolve violations. The case has taken several twists over the years, including an unsuccessful attempt by the landlord to kick Scott off the case.
The court paused the suit in a July 16 order, citing Shaker Heights Apartments Owner LLC’s appeals. The order did not specify which appeals prompted the freeze.
“The within case is stayed while the criminal cases are pending to avoid inconsistent findings and to protect the Defendant’s privilege against self-incrimination,” the order read.
The order was signed by Judge Harry Field, a retired Willoughby Municipal Court judge. Although Scott made the decision to pause the case, Field signed the order because she was out of court, according to a City of Cleveland spokesperson.
“The City strongly disagrees with and opposes Judge Scott’s decision to postpone the trial of this irresponsible property owner,” the spokesperson, Jorge Ramos Pantoja, wrote in an email. “Further delaying this case only enables the unlawful behavior of Shaker Square Apartments, LLC, and perpetuates the suffering many families are forced to endure due to this negligent landlord.”
Through a bailiff, Scott declined to comment on the delay or the appeal. An attorney for the landlord did not reply to an email seeking comment.
