Judge: Dann’s office was not in contempt of court

By JAMES NASH

COLUMBUS DISPATCH

Officials in the Ohio attorney general’s office engaged in ‘behind-the-scenes shenanigans’ during a crackdown on gambling in 2007, a judge ruled, but he stopped short of finding the office in contempt of court.

Judge Michael J. Holbrook of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas concluded this week that there wasn’t enough evidence to find the attorney general in contempt for allegedly violating a court order against seizing Tic Tac Fruit machines.

The Tic Tac Fruit devices resemble illegal slot machines but rely partly on player skill, which made them legal under a loophole in state law that was closed in October 2007.

Just before the tougher law was about to take effect, authorities in four counties raided homes and businesses connected with Tic Tac Fruit distributors and operators and tapped into dozens of bank accounts, freezing several of them.

The Tic Tac Fruit operators say the attorney general’s office coordinated the raids in violation of a court order against seizing the machines.

The attorney general at the time was Marc Dann, who had a complex relationship with operators of Tic Tac Fruit and other so-called games of skill. Dann accepted thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from the operators in 2006, but he moved to put them out of business the next year when they allegedly violated an agreement with his office.

In his ruling, Holbrook said that although actions by officials in Dann’s office ‘may have had some appearance of impropriety,’ they fell short of contempt of court. Holbrook also noted that the case has dragged on for years, during which the law on skill games has changed.

Ted Hart, a spokesman for current Attorney General Richard Cordray, said the office is pleased with the ruling.

‘The contempt allegations in this case all took place in 2007 during a previous administration,’ Hart said in a statement. ‘The court properly concluded that the office did not engage in any conduct that could constitute contempt. Furthermore, the office takes all the observations made by the court in its ruling very seriously.’

R. William Meeks, an attorney for the skill-game operators, said his clients haven’t decided whether to appeal Holbrook’s ruling. Meeks called it a ‘well-balanced’ decision.

The skill-game operators have a separate lawsuit pending in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, alleging that the 2007 raids violated their civil rights.