Abigail Ladd, et al. v. Jack Marchbanks

Following commencement of a $114 million widening and improvement project for Interstate 75, construction activity and/or the design of the project itself has caused storm and groundwater to flood and inundate the Petitioners’ respective properties on no fewer than three (3) occasions: July 13, 2017; April 26, 2019; and June 2, 2019. The flooding caused damage to the Petitioners’ respective real estate as well as loss of their personal property. The Interstate 75 improvement project was designed and undertaken under the supervision of the Ohio Department of Transportation (“ODOT”). The flooding of Petitioners’ respective properties constitutes a physical taking for which just compensation must be paid pursuant to the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. However, Ohio law does not provide any mechanism by which the Petitioners may assert a legal claim for “inverse condemnation” arising from the State’s uncompensated taking of their respective properties. Instead, an Ohio property owner must petition the court of general jurisdiction where the property is located for an equitable remedy, i.e. the issuance of a writ of mandamus compelling the State to initiate condemnation proceedings against the property owner. See Knick v. Twp. of Scott, Pennsylvania, 139 S. Ct. 2162, 2168 n.1, 204 L. Ed. 2d 558 (2019). The questions for which Petitioners seek certiorari are as follows: 1. Whether Ohio’s mandamus scheme provides its citizens with a reasonable, certain, and/or adequate procedure or process sufficient to meet the