Geauga Judge Claims He Did Nothing Wrong

( – A district family court judge is facing a 61-page complaint after he ordered jail time for two “unruly” boys who refused to obey their parents. The Ohio Supreme Court is now investigating the case and the behavior of Geauga County Judge Timothy Grendell. A Fox News local affiliate first reported the story and discussed the situation with him.

Grendell has served on the Geauga County Probate and Juvenile court for decades. The complaint against him alleges he went outside the bounds of his legal authority during a child custody case. They also accuse him of breaking certain judicial rules during public comments to the media and lawmakers.

Grendell says he’s done nothing wrong and was well within the bounds of his legal authority in that particular case as well as his constitutional rights. He suggested he was well aware of both due to his longstanding practice of law. He said that he wants the public to know “the true facts.”

The complaint has also characterized Grendell as “a bully,” he countered that critique by suggesting part of his job as a judge is to “rein in the parents” to facilitate ideal outcomes for the children.

Stacey Hartman is one of the mothers who signed onto the complaint and she said that Grendell tossed her two boys in jail when they refused to visit their father. Hartman indicated that the complaint was advanced to hold Grendell “accountable” and to prevent something similar from happening to other families.

Grendell replied that those boys were being “unruly” which is the legal term under Ohio law where children refuse to obey their parents. He implied that their temporary detention was justified and within the bounds of state law.

The investigation has only just begun and it will be months or more than a year before the state Supreme Court comes to any conclusion. If the complaint is justified by the high court, they could disbar Grendell, but he believes that won’t happen.

Grendell said he’s “very confident” that the Supreme Court will see that he not-only protected the court but also was well within his constitutional rights discussing the case.

Copyright 2024,