Gordon v. Mt. Carmel Farms, L.L.C.

Citations

• 242 N.E.3d 734
• 2024 Ohio 1313

Syllabus

The trial court's injunction was not vague where it prohibited the defendant landowner from using its property \in any way inconsistent\ with local zoning regulations and identified the types of business that the landowner was prohibited from allowing to operate on the property. Additionally, the plaintiffs had standing under R.C. 519.24 because their property was located near the defendant's property and the businesses on defendant's property caused various nuisances specific to plaintiffs. Finally, the plain language of R.C. 519.24, a special statute, makes injunctions issued under that statute different from injunctions issued under Civ.R. 65 because the statute is explicitly not limited to preserving the status quo. Defendant takes no issue with the court's factual findings, including that the companies operating on its property did so in violation of local zoning ordinances and can thus be removed from the property entirely pursuant to R.C. 519.24.