After more two years of legal filings, hearings, and back-and-forth, the final bill is in—and Portsmouth taxpayers are footing a $45,000 tab for a lawsuit that ultimately went nowhere.
The case, filed in February 2024 by former mayor and First Ward Councilman Sean Dunne, targeted fellow council members Charlotte Gordon, Lyvette Mosely, Joey Sandlin, and Andy Cole.
What the Lawsuit Was About
The lawsuit—Sean Dunne v. Charlotte Gordon, et al., filed in Scioto County Common Pleas Court—stemmed from a January 2, 2024 council vote that removed Dunne as mayor and replaced him with Gordon.
In Portsmouth, the mayor isn’t elected citywide but is chosen by council members during their organizational meeting. In that vote:
- Gordon, Mosely, Sandlin, and Cole backed Gordon
- Dunne and Dennis Packard voted to keep Dunne as mayor
Dunne immediately challenged the outcome, alleging the decision had been made ahead of time through improper private discussions.
He claimed that:
- Council members engaged in “round robin” conversations
- Phone calls and social media discussions violated Ohio’s Sunshine Laws and Open Meetings Act
- Those actions invalidated the vote
Dunne argued the case was about transparency, saying the public has a right to know how decisions are made.
How It Ended
After months of litigation, motions, and delays, the case came to a close in February 2025—not with a ruling on the merits, but with a dismissal.
The case was dismissed “with prejudice” under Civil Rule 41(A)(1)(b).
In plain terms, that means:
- The plaintiff (Dunne) voluntarily dismissed the case
- Because it was treated as a second dismissal, it is permanently closed
- The case cannot be refiled
The court also ordered that:
- Each side pays their own legal costs
- No one reimburses anyone else
For the city, that meant eating roughly $45,000 in legal fees defending council members.
Reaction from City Officials
Mayor Gordon declined to comment further on the case now that it’s closed, saying only:
“As a council, we are glad it is behind us and we are working to continue to move Portsmouth forward. It is an exciting time to be in Portsmouth. Is everything perfect? No. However, it is moving in the right direction.”
She had previously noted that, regardless of the outcome, taxpayers were the real losers as the case dragged on.
City Solicitor John Haas was far more blunt at a February council meeting, calling the lawsuit a “travesty.”
Haas said his office investigated Dunne’s claims early on and found no evidence to support them.
“Everyone said the same thing: ‘We didn’t do what he’s accusing us of doing,’” Haas said, adding that the case dragged on for nearly two years, in part due to delays in responding to discovery requests.
He called the litigation a “huge disservice” to the city.
Political Fallout
The lawsuit didn’t just cost money—it became a central issue in Portsmouth politics.
In the November 2025 election, Dunne lost his First Ward seat to former mayor David Malone by a wide margin, 65% to 35%.
The race highlighted a broader divide:
- Dunne positioned himself as a reformer focused on transparency and bold ideas
- Malone campaigned on basics—roads, services, and avoiding costly legal fights
The Fraternal Order of Police endorsed Malone and notably declined to back Dunne.
The Bottom Line
After all the filings, hearings, and headlines, the lawsuit ended without a court ruling on whether any laws were actually broken.
What remains is the cost:
- $45,000 in taxpayer-funded legal fees
- A divided council
- And a political chapter that voters ultimately closed at the ballot box
For Portsmouth, the case is now over—but the bill has already been paid.
