Posted on 02/03/2018 7:05:38 AM PST by JP1201
Drivers sent tickets by New Miami, Ohio speed cameras will be getting a refund. The state appeals court has upheld the ruling handed down by the lower court last spring. At stake is $3 million in fines, illegally obtained by the town.
The Ohio Court of Appeals on Monday delivered a heavy blow to New Miami's attempt to block a court-ordered refund of $3,066,523 in speed camera citations. The village insisted that the lower court (view ruling) got it wrong and that the village should not be forced to pay back any amount on the grounds of sovereign immunity. Not so, said the unanimous three-judge panel.
"While it is true that New Miami has the authority to enforce its traffic laws, it must do so in a constitutional manner," Judge Michael E. Powell wrote for the appellate court. "New Miami does not have the authority to do so in an unconstitutional manner."
This is the end of six year legal battle over New Miami's speed cameras. The lower court had problems with the lack of options made available to ticket recipients to challenge speeding tickets. It also had problems with New Miami's cozy relationship with the speed camera company, which provided free cameras in exchange for a percentage of collected fines. This fostered an unhealthy relationship between the two, leading to the town becoming most famous for being a speed trap. The company saddled New Miami with a minimum of 100 operating hours per camera each month. This led to spike in tickets and a healthy thirst for continual cash infusions on the part of New Miami's governance.
The Appeals Court addresses New Miami's last-ditch attempt to salvage the $3 million it obtained unconstitutionally. The town tried to go the "sovereign immunity" route, claiming it could not be held responsible for monetary damages arising from a civil suit. The court explains handing out refunds isn't the same thing as issuing a check for monetary damages. From the order [PDF]:
[P]laintiffs are seeking the recovery of the specific amount of penalties they paid pursuant to the unconstitutional ordinance and that were therefore wrongfully collected by New Miami. That is, Plaintiffs are seeking the return of specific monies that had once been in their possession and so belonged to them "in good conscience," and thus have asserted a claim for the return of the very thing to which the class was allegedly entitled in the first place. Santos, 2004-Ohio-28 at ¶ 13-14. The action seeking restitution by Plaintiffs "is not a civil suit for money damages but rather an action to correct the unjust enrichment of" New Miami. Id. at ¶ 17. As the Ohio Supreme Court plainly held, "A suit that seeks the return of specific funds wrongfully collected or held by the state is brought in equity" and "is consequently not barred by sovereign immunity."
The government also tried to claim the speed camera funds were not unjustly obtained. It argued it had a legal right to impose fines for traffic violations. The court agrees the town can indeed do that, but points out it has to comply with the Constitution when it does.
New Miami claims that this is not a case where Plaintiffs are seeking reimbursement for services rendered or money "wrongfully collected." New Miami asserts that the penalties paid by Plaintiffs were not "wrongfully collected" because New Miami has the authority "to operate traffic programs and collect penalties for violation of traffic laws."
Apparently, it is New Miami's contention that because it has legal authority to collect penalties for violation of its traffic laws, Plaintiffs' claim is necessarily for money damages based upon a denial of due process in the collection of those penalties. While it is true that New Miami has the authority to enforce its traffic laws, it must do so in a constitutional manner. New Miami does not have the authority to do so in an unconstitutional manner.
Hopefully, this will be the end of New Miami's run as "the little speed trap that could." It's been told otherwise -- twice. It can't. Not the way it's been doing things. If the town wants to assess fees for traffic violations, fine. But it has to provide an avenue for recipients to challenge tickets. Its cozy relationship with the camera company prevents that. And its contractual obligations pervert the incentives, moving it from public safety to generating revenue.
If the persons ticketed did not receive notice of how to challenge the tickets or an option of serving time I suppose that would be a lack of due process.
I remember an OH town that did something similar along a very short stretch of state road in its borders. The legislature recognized the abuse, and increased the minimum length of state road for a muni to have “authority” on the speed limit.
It would not surprise me to find that New Miami is heavily populated with Blacks. Not a racial thing but a lack of substantial valuable housing stock and commercial development is common in such towns. This means revenue through property taxes for the general fund can be very difficult to come by. So they turn to traffic fines as their main source of revenue.
I wouldn’t be surprised that this is a familiar formula for most speed trap towns.
Nope. I just read it is mostly White population. My bad. But the rest regarding lack of taxable property for general fund revenue still holds true.
>The winners here — lawyers
YEP. When do We get L’Care (fascism for the lawyer class)?
- Clients get ALL funds and lawyers can’t go after clients (like an ER/hospital)
- Lawyers can only bill X% or some break-down sheet
- etc.
Back to topic, sounds like Starke, FL...
Of the $3 million the town most likely only collected half of that with the remainder going to the camera company.
So the taxpayers will be the ones on the hook for and unsourced $1.5 mil.
I got a ticket off US rt19 in West Virginia. Same deal, dramatic drop in posted speed limit with most of the traffic being out of state. It's a 4 lane highway.
I know these guys really well. Mike Allen was our prosecutor until he got caught masturbating on the carpet in his office to impress a female lawyer in his office. He asked her to expose her breasts and then did it right on the Great Seal of Ohio which was part of the carpet in his office.
But, he is actually a great guy and he is gonna get millions since they are doing this same case in Dayton also.
Is this the one?
“In the past it was reported that about 93% of legal cases that came from Arlington Heights, were for traffic fines. Despite being the smallest town in Hamilton County, it had issued the most speeding tickets. Strangely enough though, much of that money never found its way to the village coffers. Three months ago, a state auditor discovered that two clerks for the town had pilfered $260,000 from traffic fines, over the course of several years. The staffers have since been convicted and ordered to pay restitution.”
“That case provided the town with the impetus to finally disband the police department. The town now relies on the Sheriff’s department for patrols. The former mayor of Arlington Heights claims the decision was purely financial, since the town could no longer afford the police department. Hamilton County Prosecutor Joe Deters, who has long accused the town of being a speed trap, applauded the move.”
“Basically, they were setting up speed traps on I-75 to fund the municipal workings of that village – which they then stole. I can’t quite put my finger on it, but there’s something off about a village that’s maybe a mile long setting up speed traps to raise money that then is used to fund a bunch of public employees. It just rubs me the wrong way.”
I didn't know the fine money was for "personal" use...
“Ohio is notorious for small-town speed traps. Fortunately the Interstates bypassed most of them and put them out of business.”
Do they still have those timestamped toll tickets on the Ohio Turnpike? I remember a time when you had to stop for breakfast if you were running ahead of schedule so you wouldn’t hit the exit too quickly and get a ticket for speeding.
The city can say you violated the traffic laws but it has to allow you to say "No, I didn't!" and then it has to prove it's case in court.
This is a very basic Constitutional freedom.
Heck it predates the Constitution it's self. It is in the Magna Carta.
There was a change was in the late fifties when a Canadian Government official was caught by the infamous Ludowici(GA) light on US 301! Seems that his stop caused a international dustup, as he was hospitalized. I was ticketed twice and stopped 3 times at that light(1958-60).
For a true picture of the most famous traffic light (ever)[n the USA go to,
Thanks. I guess I basically assume that an insurance company will take advantage of any information they can get to raise your premium. Imagine if they get their hands on the ancestry DNA database.
>The winners here — lawyers
Olde Billy was right!
Wouldn’t it be funny if that traffic company’s headquarters burned to the ground?
Why does this keep happening in Ohio, decade after decade?
I'd recommend the Carl Drega approach.
I'm not kidding.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.