A federal lawsuit alleges that county officials retaliated against a legal guardian for advocating on behalf of her adult daughter with disabilities, raising questions about the use of state courts to address disputes over community-based care. The complaint was filed by Leslie Turner and Niya Otoo in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio on March 13, 2026, naming the Summit County Board of Developmental Disabilities, Connie Swain in both individual and official capacities, and Clinton Householder in both individual and official capacities as defendants.
According to the filing, Leslie Turner was appointed as legal guardian for her daughter Niya Otoo by the Summit County Probate Court on April 9, 2025. The appointment was initially supported by court investigator Connie Swain. In May 2025, Otoo received approval for Medicaid funding to support 24/7 in-home care under an Individual Options Waiver. The plaintiffs state this decision reflected a determination that community-based care was appropriate under federal law.
The complaint alleges that after this approval, agents from the Summit County Board of Developmental Disabilities began seeking placement for Otoo in a more restrictive Intermediate Care Facility. Turner opposed this move, insisting on her daughter’s right to remain in an integrated setting as required by federal law. The plaintiffs claim that “Summit DD agents stated that for individuals with 24/7 needs, ‘they have ICFs for that.'”
In response to Turner’s advocacy efforts and her refusal to consent to institutionalization, the plaintiffs allege that Summit DD reduced Otoo’s approved services by 76% through an unauthorized Individual Service Plan published in August 2025. Turner did not sign this plan and instead filed reports documenting what she described as neglect and abuse resulting from these reductions.
The lawsuit further claims that on October 16, 2025—one week after Turner formally notified Summit DD she would not agree to service terminations—the agency filed a complaint with probate court seeking Turner’s removal as guardian. Plaintiffs describe this removal action as fraudulent: “It is a logical and temporal impossibility for Summit DD to have based its prior investigation on information that it simultaneously admitted it did not possess and was only then attempting to acquire.” Supporting documents attached to the complaint allegedly listed incorrect addresses linked back to Summit DD itself.
Defendant Connie Swain is accused of submitting a report filled with fabrications recommending Turner’s removal as guardian. At a January 16, 2026 hearing, Swain testified under oath about conducting interviews with Turner—a claim which plaintiffs say is false: “Defendant Swain never interviewed, spoke with, or otherwise contacted Plaintiff Turner at any point during her investigation.” Other alleged inaccuracies include inventing non-existent professionals and misrepresenting Otoo’s care providers.
Magistrate Clinton Householder is named as having issued an order on February 6, 2026 based entirely on Swain’s report. Plaintiffs argue procedural irregularities made it impossible for Turner to review or rebut evidence used against her; key documents were missing from certified court records obtained before the magistrate’s decision. The order prohibited Turner from filing documents pro se or proceeding without legal counsel—a condition she reportedly cannot afford—effectively denying her access to present a defense at an upcoming hearing scheduled for April 13, 2026.
The lawsuit asserts three main counts: First Amendment retaliation against Summit DD; deprivation of procedural due process against Swain and Householder; and violation of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act against Summit DD for allegedly attempting unjustified segregation contrary to federal mandates interpreted under Olmstead v. L.C.
Plaintiffs seek declaratory judgment confirming violations of their constitutional rights; temporary restraining orders; preliminary and permanent injunctions halting further removal proceedings; compensatory damages for emotional distress; punitive damages against individual defendants; attorneys’ fees; costs; and other relief deemed just by the court.
Leslie Turner represents herself pro se in this matter. The case is identified as Case No.: 2025 GA 00018 / Case: 5:26-cv-00603-BMB before Judge Elinore Marsh Stormer.
Source: 526cv00603_Turner_v_Summit_County_Board_of_Development_Complaint_Northern_District_Ohio.pdf
