Neighbor Accuses Neighbor Over Water Drainage Dispute

In a heated dispute between two neighbors over water drainage issues, the Ohio First District Court of Appeals has issued a mixed ruling. On December 19, 2025, the court affirmed parts of a lower court’s decision while reversing others in the case involving property owners Richard Scheidler and Theresa M. Maciejewski. The appeal was filed by Scheidler against Maciejewski after a trial court awarded her damages on her counterclaim for trespass.

The conflict began in 2020 when Maciejewski installed a French drain to manage water flow from her newly constructed patio, which allegedly increased water runoff onto Scheidler’s property. This led to claims of erosion and damage to Scheidler’s land and structures. In response, Scheidler built barriers at the property line, prompting Maciejewski to file a counterclaim alleging that these actions caused water pooling on her side.

Scheidler’s appeal raised three main points: challenging the award of actual damages to Maciejewski, disputing the summary judgment granted on his claims for trespass and nuisance, and contesting the punitive damages awarded alongside attorney fees. The appellate court found merit in some of Scheidler’s arguments but upheld others.

The court agreed with Scheidler that there was insufficient evidence to support the trial court’s award of $8,000 in actual damages to Maciejewski. It noted that Maciejewski had failed to prove that Scheidler’s actions were the proximate cause of any additional damage beyond what she had experienced over eight years due to natural conditions. Her own testimony revealed consistent water pooling issues long before Scheidler erected his wall.

Moreover, the appellate judges found that punitive damages could not be awarded without actual damages being established first—a requirement under Ohio law—and thus reversed this part of the trial court’s decision as well as the related attorney fees.

However, the appeals court did uphold the trial court’s summary judgment against Scheidler’s claims due to procedural missteps on his part. Specifically, it ruled that striking his expert witness affidavit was appropriate because it was submitted significantly past deadline without proper disclosure as required by civil procedure rules.

Ultimately, while affirming parts of the original judgments regarding liability findings against him, the appellate decision mandates further proceedings at trial level solely for determining nominal damages owed by Scheidler for trespass—signifying a partial victory for both parties involved.

The attorneys representing each party included Christopher T. Travis for Richard Scheidler and Jonathan P. Saxton along with James J. Englert from Cors & Bassett LLC representing Theresa M. Maciejewski. The presiding judge over this appellate case was Judge Crouse with Judges Bock and Nestor concurring in this complex neighborhood legal battle under Case ID C-250074.