On Wednesday, December 17, 2025, a legal challenge was filed with the Supreme Court of Ohio against Visiting Judge Janet R. Burnside by multiple relators, including Peter Restivo, Hilliard Partnership LLC, Lux Group Limited LLC, and attorney Gerald W. Phillips. The case seeks a writ of prohibition to prevent Judge Burnside from proceeding with a hearing on a motion for sanctions in a case pending before the Lorain County Common Pleas Court.

The underlying case, titled Hilliard Holding Company LLC and Hilliard Lakes, Inc. vs. Peter Restivo, Hilliard Partnership LLC, and Lux Group Limited LLC (Case No. 24 CV 212669), involves a dispute over slander of title and declaratory judgment. The relators argue that Judge Burnside lacks jurisdiction to consider sanctions related to an Affidavit to Clarify Title filed with the Lorain County Recorder’s Office, as such filings are not part of a “civil action” as defined by Ohio law.

The relators’ complaint asserts that the Second Sanctions Motion, which is the subject of the dispute, seeks sanctions under Ohio Revised Code (ORC) Section 2323.51 for the filing of the Affidavit to Clarify Title under ORC Section 5301.252. They contend that ORC Section 2323.51 pertains only to civil actions, and the filing of an affidavit with a county recorder does not constitute such an action. They emphasize that the Lorain County Recorder’s Office performs administrative, not judicial, duties when recording documents.

The complaint further states that Judge Burnside’s judicial authority is limited to civil actions, and she exceeds her authority by considering sanctions for conduct outside of a civil action. The relators argue they lack an adequate remedy at law to prevent Judge Burnside from exercising unauthorized judicial power.

In addition to a standard writ of prohibition, the relators seek a “corrective writ of prohibition” to vacate any actions already taken by Judge Burnside that are deemed an unauthorized exercise of judicial power.

The complaint highlights a scheduled hearing on the Second Sanctions Motion for December 22, 2025, and asserts that Judge Burnside is about to exercise judicial power and authority over the hearing without legal authorization. The relators request an emergency stay of the hearing and the issuance of an alternative writ of prohibition.

A copy of the original filing can be found here.