Perhaps this is going to be a re-hash, but following another postponement in the SLH lawsuit, I am seriously beginning to question Judge O'Donnell's impartiality.
According to a Cleveland.com article, a voluminous amount of evidence prevented the judge from making any rulings. O'Donnell further said during a hearing that the evidence is voluminous, but his time is not. I am not in his shoes, but I would imagine that if you must keep postponing rulings and hearings, maybe you have bitten off too much and you need to recuse yourself.
First, it is no secret that O'Donnell's and Mike Summers' property lines almost touch one another. Mike Summers is one of the key defendants listed in the lawsuit. When O'Donnell ran for Ohio Supreme Court a few years ago, Joe Gibbons donated several hundred dollars to O'Donnell's campaign. Gibbons, until recently, was a member of LHA, which is another defendant in the lawsuit. Furthermore, several known friends of defendant Mike Summers have donated to O'Donnell's past political campaigns. Thompson Hine, a law firm hired by Lakewood City Council for legal advice in the hospital deal, donated $1,500 to O'Donnell. Finally, it is worth noting that the Cleveland Building and Construction Trades Council has endorsed Judge O'Donnell in his past campaigns. This is the union that told me that they could not wait to see the hospital torn down. One of the representatives from this union also told me: "we have guys just waiting in the wings to get in there and start demolition". In addition to backing O'Donnell in the past, the Cleveland Building & Construction Trades Council endorsed Mike Summers for Mayor and Mark Schneider for Ward 3 Council.
Total, people that are associated with CCF, Mike Summers, or City Council and the Cleveland Building & Construction Trades Council donated roughly $3,200 to O'Donnell over the years.
Is this really that much for a few campaigns? Maybe or maybe not. In the absence of hard evidence to the contrary, I cannot say that he was bought or is being bought. Nevertheless, it does raise some questions and should be mulled over.
In the interests of fairness and impartiality for both sides, I feel that Judge O'Donnell should be recusing himself. There are almost thirty other judges at the Common Pleas Court that do not live in Lakewood that could potentially take the case (schedules allowing).
Again, I will reiterate that I am not trying to say that O'Donnell was bought. Nevertheless, the lawsuit was filed in May of 2015. I believe that this is the third postponement. This has given CCF a voluminous amount of time to push the deal through. In my personal opinion, I do not feel that O'Donnell has been 100% impartial or efficient. He is running for Ohio Supreme Court this year. I am beginning to think that the other two candidates may be better options. I may call the campaigns for his other two opponents, tell them the story, and get their opinion.
FWIW.
Should Judge O'Donnell Have Recused Himself in SLH Lawsuit?
Moderator: Jim O'Bryan
-
Lori Allen _
- Posts: 2550
- Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2015 2:37 pm
-
cameron karslake
- Posts: 646
- Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2015 8:35 am
Re: Should Judge O'Donnell Have Recused Himself in SLH Lawsuit?
Well Lori, you have to wonder.
I was not at the recent conference (1/21/15) so I cannot speak to what went on but regarding this line that you shared:
"According to a Cleveland.com article, a voluminous amount of evidence prevented the judge from making any rulings. O'Donnell further said during a hearing that the evidence is voluminous, but his time is not." (emphasis added).
...pretty much mirrors the exact words O'Donnell used back on Dec. 8/2015 when I was there, and he kicked the can down the road to this past Thursday, Jan. 21/2016.
Now it seems he's kicked the can down the road for over another month, waiting for the point of no return to appear perhaps? Is he waiting for more volumes of evidence to be presented? All these volumes of evidence are not going to go away, your honor. You would think all this evidence would tell him that this case has merit and it should proceed. We've all heard of cases being dragged out in court for years but this is ridiculous. Or, is it business as usual? I guess I just answered my own question.
I was not at the recent conference (1/21/15) so I cannot speak to what went on but regarding this line that you shared:
"According to a Cleveland.com article, a voluminous amount of evidence prevented the judge from making any rulings. O'Donnell further said during a hearing that the evidence is voluminous, but his time is not." (emphasis added).
...pretty much mirrors the exact words O'Donnell used back on Dec. 8/2015 when I was there, and he kicked the can down the road to this past Thursday, Jan. 21/2016.
Now it seems he's kicked the can down the road for over another month, waiting for the point of no return to appear perhaps? Is he waiting for more volumes of evidence to be presented? All these volumes of evidence are not going to go away, your honor. You would think all this evidence would tell him that this case has merit and it should proceed. We've all heard of cases being dragged out in court for years but this is ridiculous. Or, is it business as usual? I guess I just answered my own question.
-
Lori Allen _
- Posts: 2550
- Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2015 2:37 pm
Re: Should Judge O'Donnell Have Recused Himself in SLH Lawsuit?
Thanks, Cameron. Right now, I am looking into other conflicts of interest at the judicial and county level. If I find anything else worth listing, I will post it here on the Deck.
While I cannot prove anything, was O'Donnell selected at random or was it planned? If it has taken him almost a year to review the evidence, I am wondering if he is quite ready to be on the Ohio Supreme Court bench yet. Everything just seems to convenient for the defendants. Perhaps there is more than meets the eye.
FWIW.
While I cannot prove anything, was O'Donnell selected at random or was it planned? If it has taken him almost a year to review the evidence, I am wondering if he is quite ready to be on the Ohio Supreme Court bench yet. Everything just seems to convenient for the defendants. Perhaps there is more than meets the eye.
FWIW.