On Friday, August 1, 2025, the Ohio Board of Professional Conduct recommended a two-year suspension from the practice of law for Judge Leslie Ann Celebrezze, a Cuyahoga County Domestic Relations Court judge, with one year stayed, citing multiple ethical violations in high-profile divorce cases.
The case is entitled “In the Matter of Judge Leslie Ann Celebrezze,” with case number 2024-024.
The board’s 30-page report detailed a series of infractions, including favoritism, improper case assignments, undisclosed personal relationships, and false statements during the disciplinary process. Celebrezze, who has served as a judge since 2009, is accused of breaching 15 rules of judicial and professional conduct.
The investigation primarily focused on Celebrezze’s relationship with Mark Dottore, a court-appointed receiver involved in several cases under her oversight. The report revealed that Celebrezze approved over $400,000 in fees to Dottore and his legal counsel in a divorce case involving Strongsville funeral home owners Jason and Crystal Jardine. She failed to disclose a longstanding personal relationship with Dottore, which included frequent private meetings, home and office visits, and an incident where they were seen kissing outside a restaurant, as captured by surveillance footage. Although Celebrezze initially denied a romantic relationship, she later acknowledged deep emotional feelings for Dottore and had consulted attorneys about divorcing her husband.
The board also found that Celebrezze manipulated case assignments to ensure certain divorce cases were assigned to her docket, bypassing the standard random reassignment process required after a judge’s recusal. In some instances, she signed entries falsely claiming cases were randomly assigned.
Additionally, in one case, Celebrezze allegedly pressured Judge Colleen Reali to transfer a case to her, suggesting it could affect a writ of mandamus filed against Reali. She also referenced a nonexistent administrative docket motion, which the board described as deceptive behavior driven by a dishonest motive.
Further compounding the violations, Celebrezze made false statements during the disciplinary investigation regarding her relationship with Dottore and her interactions with attorneys involved in her cases. Notably, she referred to attorney Robert Glickman, who represented a party in one of her cases, as her personal lawyer but did not recuse herself or disclose this connection. The board stated that these actions undermined public confidence in the judiciary, emphasizing that judges must uphold the highest standards of integrity and impartiality.
The board identified several aggravating factors, including a pattern of misconduct across four cases over two years, multiple rule violations, false statements during the investigation, and a dishonest motive in concealing her relationship with Dottore. However, Celebrezze’s lack of prior disciplinary history and letters attesting to her good character were noted as mitigating factors.
The Ohio Supreme Court will now review the board’s findings and determine whether to impose the recommended two-year suspension, with one year stayed, contingent on Celebrezze committing no further misconduct and covering the costs of the proceedings.
A copy of the original filing can be found here.
