A state appellate court has affirmed a lower court’s decision that a vacant residential property poses an ongoing public nuisance, following years of unresolved code violations and concerns for community safety. The ruling allows city officials to move forward with efforts to clean up and rehabilitate the site, which they say has long been hazardous to both its owner and neighbors.
The City of University Heights filed the complaint against property owner Robert Weizman in Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas on July 18, 2023, seeking both preliminary and permanent injunctions related to the house at 4394 Groveland Road. The Eighth District Court of Appeals released its opinion on March 5, 2026, affirming the trial court’s judgment.
According to case records, city officials began notifying Weizman about building and housing code violations as early as 2002. After repeated notices went unaddressed, the city declared the property a public nuisance on September 6, 2022. Testimony from Geoffrey Englebrecht, Housing Community Development Director for University Heights, described extensive debris in the driveway and interior conditions consistent with hoarding. “When we walked into the property there was no drywall. There were only studs. There were holes in the floor… walkways might have been three feet wide. Floor to ceiling of junk, debris, personal items,” Englebrecht stated during a hearing.
Englebrecht also testified that there was no visible toilet or reliable heat source inside the home and noted buckets containing unknown substances. He expressed concern for Weizman’s health due to these living conditions. The city’s building commissioner ordered the house vacated after determining it was not fit for human habitation—a decision Weizman did not appeal.
Photographs taken in August 2022 showed clutter blocking access points, exposed wiring, water damage, missing walls and ceilings, sunlight coming through holes in the roof, and rooms rendered unwalkable by debris. A letter from the Cuyahoga County Board of Health recommended elevating the structure to city standards due to fire hazards and unsanitary conditions: “Any kind of rescue during a fire or medical emergency would be a challenge to first responders due to these conditions.” Neighbors also complained about ongoing issues at the site.
Weizman represented himself throughout proceedings in trial court. He testified that he had removed most exterior items except for “about ten bags of mulch for the flower beds, a vehicle, and a gas grill.” He maintained that “the Property does not pose a blight to the neighborhood” but admitted under cross-examination that there was no electricity, gas or water service at the house and that he was not living there.
During hearings held on September 3, 2024 (preliminary injunction) and January 21, 2025 (permanent injunction), city officials including Mayor Michael D. Brennan described long-standing efforts to address what they called “problem properties.” Brennan testified that since becoming mayor in January 2018 he had prioritized such cases: “We have sought and obtained administrative search warrants…for purposes of health, safety and welfare.” He confirmed that over two decades University Heights prosecuted Weizman ten times for housing code violations concerning this property without achieving compliance.
At trial’s conclusion on February 4, 2025, Judge Eileen A. Gallagher found substantial evidence supporting both notice given to Weizman regarding violations and his failure to correct them: “In its current condition, the Property constitutes a public nuisance,” she wrote in her order granting permanent injunction relief.
The court appointed a receiver pursuant to Ohio Revised Code section 3767.41—authorizing them to take control of the property; pay expenses including taxes (which exceeded $40,000 as of June 2023); perform necessary cleanup; abate nuisances; and prevent Weizman from interfering with abatement activities except during an initial sixty-day period when he could remove personal belongings.
On appeal Weizman raised three assignments of error: first arguing lack of current evidence about physical condition; second disputing whether statutory requirements for declaring a public nuisance were met; third challenging appointment of receivership without submission of a full financial plan as required by law. The appellate panel rejected all three arguments.
The opinion states: “We find substantial and undisputed evidence that the Property is a public nuisance as defined in R.C. 3767.41.” Regarding receivership procedures—which require submission of rehabilitation plans—the court acknowledged only an initial $6,000 estimate for cleaning out debris had been provided but concluded this step was necessary before further planning could occur: “It would defy logic to hold that a cleanup is necessary before establishing a plan but a plan is necessary before cleanup can occur.”
Ultimately judgment was affirmed against Weizman with costs taxed accordingly. Attorneys Michael E. Cicero and John B. Moenk represented University Heights; Daniel F. Lindner represented Robert Weizman on appeal before Judges Eileen A. Gallagher (author), Lisa B. Forbes (presiding), and Emanuella D. Groves under case number CV-23-982540.
Source: 2026Ohio733_City_of_University_Heights_v_Weizman_Opinion_Ohio_Court_of_Appeals.pdf