Group asks Ohio Supreme Court to hear its case for blocking Menards store near Montrose

A citizen's group has filed an appeal to the Ohio Supreme Court in connection to a proposed Menards retail store near the Montrose border in Granger Township.

Members of Citizens Action Group, which had filed civil cases starting in spring 2021 in an attempt to stop the project. Menard Inc. received approval for the first phase of The Market at Medina Line, a retail complex constructed by Menard Inc., which would be on a 125-acre site along Route 18 and Medina Line Road.

Citizens Action Group stated the planned complex fails to meet the township's zoning resolution. In a statement on its website, the group says it opposes the project because of "the filling of wetland, destruction of rural farmland, increased flooding to neighborhood homes, decreased property values," and other reasons.

In September, however, the Ohio Ninth Judicial District Court of Appeals upheld the ruling by Medina County Common Pleas Court that the group, which had filed civil cases in an attempt to stop the project, had no legal standing to file a case in the courts. In the ruling, Judge Lynne Callahan in the ruling stated that, as a nonprofit organization, did not have the ability to file a court case.

Citizens group appeal denied:State appeals court rejects challenge to planned Menards store near Montrose

Background on Menard Inc. project:New Menards off state Route 18 gets go-ahead as part of Granger Township retail site

Jeff Abbott, a spokesperson for Menard Inc., declined to comment.

Andrew J. Karas, an attorney with Fair Shakes Environmental Legal Services who served as the legal representative for Citizens Action Group, said in a previous interview that he was disappointed with the appeals court ruling.

"The ability of nonprofit community organizations to pursue court battles on their members’ behalf is an important access-to-justice issue that has broad implications beyond our local challenge to this unpopular construction project," Karas said.

In the brief filed by Karas, he said organizations can represent themselves in court in behalf of their members.

"An association has standing to bring a lawsuit on behalf of its membership where its members would otherwisehave standing to sue in their own right; the interests the association seeks to protect are germane to its purpose; and neither the claim asserted, nor the relief requested requires the participation of individual members in the lawsuit," the Nov. 3 court filing says. "Importantly, associational standing is not an exception to the rule that a litigant must demonstrate it has suffered a particularized injury; rather, because the associational standing test incorporates traditional standing analysis into its first prong, it acts as a kind of “stepsister of traditional individual standing. Accordingly, the decisions of the trial and appellate courts below, together with those courts of appeal that have held similarly, get certain crucial rudiments of standing doctrine wrong."

No court date has been set for the appeal, which was filed Thursday afternoon.

Reporter April Helms can be reached at ahelms@thebeaconjournal.com

This article originally appeared on Akron Beacon Journal: Group asks Ohio Supreme Court to block planned Menards near Montrose