Oster held a couple hearings this summer over the issue of the 10-year payout and whether he would reconsider Sage’s decision based on new case law that favors the speeder catching programs.
Mike Allen, one of the attorneys for the speeders, during the August hearing argued the 10-year-rule didn’t apply and their clients have waited long enough to be made whole.
“We would respectfully submit that it would not be just to members of our class,” Allen said. “Simply put, they’ve been waiting for five years for a resolution on this matter and giving the village an additional 10 years we think would fly in the face of fairness.”
The village’s outside counsel James Englert argued that the speeders are only out $95, but the impact on the residents of New Miami would be devastating if the whole refund is due.
“If they get that over a period of time, how does that affect their lives, well marginally I would submit,” Englert said. “For the citizens of New Miami, if there is no longer a village to perform those functions, it hits a lot harder to 2,500 citizens of the village, than it does the members of the class with $95 at stake.”
Oster didn’t go into detail on his decision, he just wrote, “after balancing the interests of the village of New Miami and of the persons in whose favor the judgment was rendered, the court finds annual installments over a period of ten years to be appropriate in this case.”
MORE: Butler County police chief’s kidney transplant a success
Englert said the ruling was right, but he is anxious to finally get to the heart of the case.
“The village is pleased with these rulings, which recognize that the Village has been fiscally responsible, and allowing payment of a judgment over time, as Ohio law allows, if that survives the appeal,” Englert told the Journal-News. “There is really now only the matter of awarding attorney fees to plaintiff counsel, then the village will finally be able to appeal the substantive issue of whether its administrative hearing for the speeding fine violated due process.”
He still maintains higher court rulings have already answered the due process question. But during the last hearing Oster announced that he was unswayed by recent decisions in other court jurisdictions and refused to reconsider the question of unconstitutionality. He also ruled a financial watchdog was unnecessary.