Ohio homeowners are battling the state over property tax foreclosures, alleging constitutional violations in a case that highlights the harsh realities of tax delinquency. Angelo D. Craig, Angela Taylor, and Abraham David filed a class-action lawsuit against Brad Cromes, the treasurer of Cuyahoga County, and Cuyahoga County itself on December 24, 2025. The case was heard in the Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth Appellate District.
The plaintiffs claim that their properties were taken without just compensation after failing to sell at public auctions due to unpaid taxes. They argue this amounts to inverse condemnation and excessive fines under Ohio’s Constitution. The homeowners’ properties were forfeited to the state when they failed to sell at auction for their minimum bid values—$12,169.83 for Craig’s home, $17,718.79 for Taylor’s home, and $27,322.34 for David’s home—after being foreclosed upon due to tax delinquencies ranging from $620.97 to $4,654.62.
The homeowners assert that Ohio law unjustly deprives them of any surplus value their homes might have had above what they owed in taxes once forfeited to the state—a process they claim violates both the Takings Clause and Excessive Fines Clause of the Ohio Constitution. They point to a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Tyler v. Hennepin County as support for their argument that retaining surplus equity constitutes an unlawful taking.
However, the court found these claims insufficient under existing legal precedents in Ohio. The trial court dismissed their claims based on Civ.R. 12(B)(6), indicating failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted because mandamus is deemed the appropriate action for such takings claims under Ohio law—a view supported by previous rulings such as State ex rel. Boggs v. Cleveland.
The court also rejected the excessive fines argument by clarifying that Ohio’s tax-foreclosure scheme is primarily a debt-collection mechanism rather than punitive action designed to impose fines within constitutional meaning.
Ultimately, the appellate court affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of all claims brought by Craig and his fellow plaintiffs, concluding that neither constitutional clause was violated under current interpretations of Ohio law regarding property tax foreclosures.
Representing the appellants were attorneys from Ashbrook Byrne Kresge Flowers LLC with Benjamin M. Flowers and Joseph P. Ashbrook; Hughes & Suhr LLC with Daniel R. Suhr; and Spero Law LLC with Christopher Mills appearing pro hac vice while Roetzel & Andress LPA represented appellees with Stephen W Funk and Emily K Anglewicz leading their defense team before judges Michelle J Sheehan (P.J.), Kathleen Ann Keough (J.), Deena R Calabrese (J.) under Case No CV-24-999435
Source: 2025Ohio5759_Craig_v_Cromes_Opinion_Ohio_Court_of_Appeals.pdf