An attempt by Elmwood Place’s attorneys to disqualify Common Pleas Court Judge Robert Ruehlman from the Speed Camera Case has been rejected by the Chief Justice of the Ohio Supreme Court.
The decision from the Supreme Court found that Ruehlman followed the law and did not act in a biased manner.
Read the Decision Here.
Mike Allen told the Cincinnati Enquirer that “Judge Ruehlman showed absolutely no evidence of bias or prejudice.”
A hearing on a motion to find Elmwood Place in contempt for its continues use of the cameras despite the Judge’s Order will take place later this month.
The Elmwood Speed Camera case has received both national and international attention. Here is a sampling of articles:
|USA Today - Judge slams Ohio village’s speed camerasIn a scathing ruling, a Hamilton County judge ruled that an ordinance allowing this village of 2,000 to install speed cameras is invalid and unenforceable. Mike Allen said, “It is obvious that the village of Elmwood is motivated by financial considerations and not public safety. . . This is a victory for the common man and woman who does not have $105 to give to the village of Elmwood.”
msnNOW – Judge bans speed cameras, calls them ‘a scam’ against drivers
Imagine that — another legal challenge to those cameras intended to snare speeders. Only this time, a judge has ruled in favor of motorists. Calling the speed cameras in the small Ohio village of Elmwood Place ”a scam,” Hamilton County Common Pleas Judge Robert Ruehlman ruled they were unconstitutional. He hammered the village, writing that it was “engaged in nothing more than a high-tech game of 3-Card Monty.”
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 7, 2013
Contact: Mike Allen
513-445-9600 (o), 513-479-4106 (c)
www.mkallenlaw.com | @mkallenlaw
JUDGE ISSUES PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION SHUTTING DOWN ELMWOOD SPEED CAMERAS
Hamilton County Common Pleas Court Judge Robert Ruehlman has issued a Preliminary Injunction prohibiting the use of speed cameras in the Village of Elmwood Place.
Read the opinion: Elmwood Decision
The Preliminary Injunction was issued on March 7, 2013. The Injunction was issued following a hearing in January.
Attorney Michael K. Allen filed a lawsuit on November 30, 2012 on behalf of motorists and community members. The lawsuit alleges that the Ordinance is in violation of Ohio law and the Ohio Constitution. The lawsuit raises a number of procedural arguments related to the enactment of the Ordinance. The lawsuit also alleges that the Ordinance violates the due process rights of citizens.
The Judge wrote, ““Elmwood Place is engaged in nothing more than a high-tech game of 3 card Monty. . . It is a scam the motorist cannot win.”
Elmwood Place installed traffic cameras that record vehicle speed in September. Thousands of citations have been issued, and Elmwood Place has estimated that the program generates revenues in excess of $350,000 each month.
Allen has stated that the preliminary injunction is appropriate because the due process concerns of citizens outweighs any benefits of the speed camera program. “I think it is appropriate for the Court to err on the side of protecting citizens because it appears that the Village was motivated more by financial considerations than public safety.”