The Ohio Supreme Court on Wednesday ordered the city of East Cleveland to pay upwards of $30 million to satisfy a judgment in favor of a man who won a jury verdict finding that police officers wrongfully detained him and caused serious injuries in the process.

In the opinion, the justices granted a writ of mandamus to Arnold Black, saying East Cleveland has a clear legal duty to pay out the judgment, and Black had no other legal recourse to enforce that judgment as he cannot commence a regular enforcement action against the city under state law.

According to the opinion, Black was arrested in April 2012 during a traffic stop by East Cleveland police officers, who beat and arrested him after Black told them that he did not know who sold drugs in the city. Black alleged that he was left in a storage room for four days, with no bed or toilet, and his former fiancée testified that his head was swollen when he was released.

Black sued Police Chief Ralph Scotts, Detective Randy Hicks and the city, and in August 2019 a jury returned a verdict in his favor, awarding $20 million in compensatory damages, plus $5 million in prejudgment interest, plus $15 million in punitive damages from Scotts and Hicks. The following year, an appeals court affirmed the judgment, and both the state and U.S. Supreme Courts denied review of the verdict.

Black's attorney contacted the city in October 2021 seeking to satisfy the judgment, but the city did not acknowledge or respond to the letter, and Black commenced the action seeking the writ in February 2023 and asked for the $20 million judgment, plus nearly $10.5 million in interest.

According to Wednesday's opinion, Black's evidence clearly and convincingly established that he's entitled to the relief because as he prevailed at a jury trial, which gives him a clear legal right to the judgment, while the city has a clear legal duty to satisfy the amounts.

While the city argued that a motion it made at trial to enforce a damages cap meant there was a dispute about how much money it owed Black and that therefore he hasn't established a clear legal right, the justices disagreed.

According to the opinion, Black has submitted sufficient evidence to establish exactly how much the city owes him, including the jury's interrogatories and verdict, including the amount of compensatory damages, the trial court's judgment ordering the city to pay and an appeals court's judgment affirming the verdict and monetary awards.

As such, the justices ordered the city to satisfy the judgment, including prejudgment interest and postjudgment interest from the verdict to the date it is paid, and if the city does not have the funds, it is to appropriate funds to satisfy the judgment and interest.

"This decision is one of many we've seen over 11 years of struggle to get justice for Arnold," Robert F. DiCello of DiCello Levitt LLP, representing Black, told Law360 on Wednesday. "The most important feature of the decision is that it represents his only opportunity for justice for what happened to him."

Representatives for the city could not immediately be reached for comment Wednesday.

Black is represented by Robert F. DiCello and Justin J. Hawal of DiCello Levitt LLP.

East Cleveland is represented by Benjamin J. Reeb and Jeffry D. Harris of Bricker Graydon LLP.

The case is The State ex rel. Black v. The City of East Cleveland, case number 2023-0244, in the Supreme Court of Ohio.

--Additional reporting by Cara Salvatore. Editing by Rich Mills.