Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Court of Claims official explains statutory limits on wrongful-imprisonment awards

July 21, 2025 | State Controlling Board, Joint, Committees, Legislative, Ohio


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Court of Claims official explains statutory limits on wrongful-imprisonment awards
Anderson Renick, clerk for the Ohio Court of Claims, told the Controlling Board on July 21 that the bulk of damages in wrongful-imprisonment cases are determined by statute, which currently sets a per-year payment that is adjusted for inflation. The board approved the related item without objection.

Representative Teresa Brennan questioned why Dewey Jones’s family struggled to obtain restitution after Jones died following his release from prison. Renick explained the two-step process for these claims: first a trial court must declare a person wrongfully imprisoned, then the claimant brings a damages case to the Court of Claims. "The main part of the damages — the yearly rate — is set by statute and is adjusted for inflation," Renick said, and he quoted the current statutory figure as $68,808.38 per year of incarceration. He added that judges may award additional damages for lost wages and attorneys’ fees.

Renick described Jones’s case as unusual because Jones died after release but before the damages phase; the Attorney General’s Office argued the claim did not survive to heirs, and the matter included appeals and a settlement before the Court of Claims ultimately approved payment. Renick said the settlement was approved by a judge after the parties reached agreement; the figure cited in media coverage was $540,000, but Renick emphasized the settlement components were statutory damages plus attorneys’ fees. Representative Brennan said she intends to press colleagues to increase the statutory per-year rate.

Discussion only: the clerk explained statutory mechanics, inflation adjustments, and the procedural history of this specific case; members asked about when the statute was last changed and whether courts have authority to increase awards beyond the statutory rate.

Formal action: the Controlling Board approved the Court of Claims item (item 55) without objection.

The court clerk offered to follow up with additional details if members requested them during the meeting.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Ohio articles free in 2025

https://workplace-ai.com/
https://workplace-ai.com/