City of East Cleveland

Motion to enforce arbitration award R.C. 2711.09 sanctions contempt temporary restraining order preliminary injunction law-of-the case doctrine res judicata laches. The trial court did not err in granting the appellees' motion to confirm and enforce the arbitration award and setting a damages amount. The damages amount was consistent with the arbitration award mandate that the city of East Cleveland "make all affected [firefighters] whole in back pay/lost benefits who would have been entitled to overtime on the call-out list under the terms of the [CBA] at any/all dates post April 12, 2016." Appellees provided evidence calculating what the city of East Cleveland owed in backpay on any and all dates after April 12, 2016, where the city was in violation of the CBA. Further, the trial court's award of sanctions to the appellees was separate and distinct from its later confirmation of the arbitration award. Appellants were sanctioned for violating the trial court's preliminary injunction ordering them to staff the fire department pursuant to the CBA. The confirmation of the arbitration award quantified damages and was the first time the court issued an entry related to the arbitration award. Accordingly, the law-of-the-case doctrine and res judicata are inapplicable. Laches is also inapplicable because appellants have not demonstrated that there was an unreasonable delay on behalf of the appellees. Judgment affirmed.

Sanctions reduce monetary obligation to judgment hearing R.C. 2705.02 res judicata R.C. 4711 standing and Civ.R. 25. Issues raised and addressed in prior appeals are barred by res judicata. A union has standing to file an injunction on behalf of its members where at least one member suffers immediate or threatened injury as a result of the contested action. Where the complaint named the defendant-appellant City's mayor and fire chief in their official capacities as defendants, the defendant-appellant City was not prejudiced by the fact that the city no longer employed the named mayor and fire chief. Under Civ.R. 25, the individuals currently holding those official positions were automatically substituted for the named defendants and could be called as witnesses on behalf of the City.