Record · Litigation
Thor Equities, LLC et al. v. City of Urbana, Ohio et al.
litigation-thor-v-urbana
source
- instrument federal-complaint
- file data/documents/legal/thor-v-urbana/1.pdf
- sha256 95efdb0457b36e2da0dcf497ad34fe4e85863b83f4f01bc60422eb58343fbd3c
- content_verified text-layer
case
- caption Thor Equities, LLC et al. v. City of Urbana, Ohio et al.
- court U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio, Western Division
- case_no 3:26-cv-00196-MJN-CHG
- filed 2026-06-19
- jury_demand yes
- ohio_ag_served yes
- jurisdiction
- 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question)
- 28 U.S.C. § 1343(a)(3) (civil rights)
- 28 U.S.C. § 1367 (supplemental)
- 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1) (diversity)
- 28 U.S.C. § 2201 (declaratory judgment)
- venue 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2)
plaintiffs
- name Thor Equities, LLC
- citizenship New York (Delaware LLC; two NY-citizen members)
- address 25 West 39th Street, New York, NY 10018
- role site-plan applicant
- name Urbana Owner LLC
- citizenship New York (Delaware LLC; member → Delaware LLC → Delaware trust, NY trustees)
- address 3040 Riverside Drive, Ste 122, Columbus, OH 43221
- role contract purchaser
- parcels_under_contract
- K48-25-11-01-36-001-00
- portion of K48-25-11-01-37-001-00
- name Urbana Owner I LLC
- citizenship New York
- address 3040 Riverside Drive, Ste 122, Columbus, OH 43221
- role owner
- parcels_owned
- K48-25-11-01-30-001-00
- name Urbana Owner II LLC
- citizenship New York
- address 3040 Riverside Drive, Ste 122, Columbus, OH 43221
- role owner
- parcels_owned
- K48-25-11-01-30-005-00
- K48-25-11-01-30-006-00
- name Highland55 Investments LLC
- citizenship New York
- address 3040 Riverside Drive, Ste 122, Columbus, OH 43221
- role owner
- parcels_owned
- K48-25-11-01-32-005-00
property
- owned_acres ~230.346
- under_contract_acres —
- location Champaign County, Ohio — west of S. U.S. Highway 68, Urbana Township / annexed into the City of Urbana
- owned_parcels
- K48-25-11-01-30-001-00
- K48-25-11-01-32-005-00
- K48-25-11-01-30-006-00
- K48-25-11-01-30-005-00
- under_contract
- K48-25-11-01-36-001-00
- portion of K48-25-11-01-37-001-00
- reconciliation The four OWNED parcels + owners exactly match land-assembly.yaml (auditor CAMA, #1328), now corroborated by a filed federal instrument. Doc #1 ADDS a fifth entity — Urbana Owner LLC, the [verified] contract purchaser of the two -36/-37 parcels not previously in the assembly (still under contract, not yet conveyed; their acreage is [open] and is ADDITIONAL to the ~230.346-ac owned holding). On mailing addresses: the complaint CAPTION lists all four SPEs at 3040 Riverside Drive Ste 122, Columbus, and Thor Equities LLC at 25 W 39th St, New York. The auditor CAMA agrees for Highland55 (3040 Riverside) but records Urbana Owner I and Urbana Owner II at 25 W 39th St, New York (c/o Thor) — so the caption vs auditor address for those two is NOT resolved; it stays [inference]/[open] pending the Ohio SoS agent pull.
defendants
- name City of Urbana, Ohio
- kind chartered municipal corporation, Champaign County
- address 205 S. Main Street, Urbana, OH 43078
- name Urbana, Ohio City Council
- kind legislative body — eight elected officials
- name Urbana, Ohio Building and Zoning Appeals Board (BZA)
- kind administrative body — five members; hears appeals of the Zoning Inspector
counsel
- firm Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP
- address 52 East Gay Street, P.O. Box 1008, Columbus, OH 43216-1008
- attorneys
- Joseph R. Miller (0068463) — Trial Attorney
- Christopher L. Ingram (0086325)
- Elizabeth S. Alexander (0096401)
- Garrett M. Anderson (0100121)
- Brodi S. Voight (0105912)
- for Plaintiffs (Thor Equities and the four SPEs)
counts
- n 1
- title Procedural Due Process
- basis 42 U.S.C. § 1983 + Ohio Const. Art. I §§ 1, 16
- paras 94–103
- gist Deprivation of a vested property/liberty interest in the data-center use without lawful process (notice, fair BZA hearing, consideration of evidence).
- n 2
- title Substantive Due Process
- basis 42 U.S.C. § 1983 + Ohio Const. Art. I §§ 1, 16
- paras 104–112
- gist The moratorium, application denial, and appeal handling were arbitrary, capricious, and lacking any substantial relation to legitimate land-use regulation.
- n 3
- title Declaratory Judgment — Moratorium void (Charter § 2.12)
- basis 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201–2202
- paras 113–117
- gist Charter § 2.12 bars enacting/amending/repealing any zoning or building resolution as an emergency; the moratorium is a de facto zoning amendment.
- n 4
- title Declaratory Judgment — Moratorium void (Charter § 2.11)
- basis 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201–2202
- paras 118–123
- gist Res. 2727-26 is not necessary for public peace/health/welfare/safety and does not set forth the specific facts necessitating the emergency.
- n 5
- title Declaratory Judgment — Moratorium void (Ohio Const. Art. XVIII §3 + R.C. 731.30)
- basis 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201–2202
- paras 124–130
- gist The emergency exceeds the City's home-rule authority and R.C. 731.30's emergency-ordinance requirements.
- n 6
- title Declaratory Judgment — Moratorium void (Charter §§ 2.10, 2.16 + Zoning Code Ch. 1113)
- basis 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201–2202
- paras 131–140
- gist No newspaper publication 7 days before enactment, no Planning-Commission referral, no 10-day notice, and passed on one reading (three required for permanent legislation).
- n 7
- title Declaratory Judgment — Moratorium an unlawful impairment of vested rights
- basis 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201–2202
- paras 141–151
- gist Filing the Feb-13-2026 site-plan application froze the zoning rules (Golf Vill. N. LLC v. City of Powell; Gibson v. Oberlin); the later moratorium cannot retroactively defeat the vested use.
- n 8
- title Declaratory Judgment — Site-plan denial violated Zoning Code Ch. 1110
- basis 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201–2202
- paras 152–160
- gist The City denied the application as 'incomplete' by importing Chapter 1161 (major-subdivision) requirements and a traffic study that Chapter 1110 site-plan review does not require — ultra vires.
key_authority_cited
- Golf Vill. N. LLC v. City of Powell, 826 F. App'x 426, 433 (6th Cir. 2020) — filing an application 'freezes' the applicable zoning rules
- Gibson v. Oberlin, 171 Ohio St. 1, 5 (1960) — vesting on application for a zoning certificate
- Snyder v. City of Bowling Green, 1996 Ohio App. LEXIS 5580 (6th Dist.) — insufficient emergency basis
relief_sought
- Compensatory damages (jury)
- Declarations that the Moratorium (Res. 2727-26) is void ab initio on five independent grounds (Charter §§ 2.10/2.11/2.12/2.16, Zoning Ch. 1113, Ohio Const. Art. XVIII §3, R.C. 731.30)
- Declaration that the site-plan denial violated Zoning Ch. 1110 and that the Application was complete
- Declaration of a vested right to the data-center use under the rules in effect at filing
- Preliminary + permanent injunction (Fed. R. Civ. P. 65) barring enforcement of the Moratorium and the amended Zoning Code against the Property, and directing approval of the Application
- Pre-/post-judgment interest; attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988; costs
alleged_investment
- total_usd >19600000
- land_usd >12500000
- tui_usd 1274198
- due_diligence_usd 714135
- design_usd 5180000
- lost_profit_claimed_usd >118000000
- note Pleaded reliance/damages figures; a party's averment. [reference]. '>' prefixes mark floor values (see comments).
alleged_facts
- The City encouraged Thor's investment from Dec-2024 and gave repeated assurances (¶¶41–47).
- The Feb-20-2026 'incomplete' denial was pretextual — the cited Ch. 1161 items don't govern site-plan review (¶¶56–59).
- The moratorium was a pretext to stop an already-authorized use; council members admitted no information would change their minds (¶¶65–66).
- The BZA hearing was procedurally defective: no lawful notice, denied continuance, only 4 of 5 members present (four votes needed to sustain an appeal), evidence disregarded (¶¶76–85).
public_records_thread
- date 2026-03-10
- event Thor R.C. 149.43(B) request for a copy of the Moratorium; follow-up email 2026-03-12; no response. (¶68)
- date 2026-03-13
- event In-person request at the municipal building denied; access to the Law Director denied — though a Council member had already posted portions of the Moratorium to Facebook. (¶69)
- date 2026-03-17
- event Thor's written demand that the non-response violated R.C. 149.43; City produced the Moratorium the next day (2026-03-18). (¶70)
- date 2026-04-03
- event Second R.C. 149.43(B) request (records re the Ordinances, Moratorium, Property). (¶73)
- date 2026-04-15
- event Thor again demands compliance; City counsel responds 2026-05-19 that Thor's deadlines are inapplicable; as of filing no responsive document produced to the Apr-3 request. (¶¶74–75)
ordinance_record
- id Ordinance 4619-25
- exhibit 1
- adopted 2025-04-22
- action Annexation of nine parcels (~219.986 ac) into the City of Urbana
- tag reference
- id Ordinance 4625-25
- exhibit 2
- adopted 2025-04-22
- action Official Zoning Map update — designates annexed areas (incl. parcels of the Property) M-1 Manufacturing District
- tag reference
- id Ordinance 4620-25
- exhibit 3
- adopted 2025-04-22
- action Amends Zoning Code Ch. 1102 — adds definitions for computing-infrastructure providers, incl. data centers
- tag reference
- id Ordinance 4621-25
- exhibit 4
- adopted 2025-04-22
- action Amends Zoning Code Ch. 1126 — adds 'Computing Infrastructure Providers, Data Processing, Web Hosting, and Related Services' as PRINCIPALLY PERMITTED uses in M-1
- tag reference
- significance This is the by-right entitlement Thor claims vested — data centers permitted in M-1 on the Property.
- id Ordinance 4631-25
- exhibit —
- adopted 2025-11-04
- action Approves CRA #2 (Community Reinvestment Area) tax-incentive district supporting the Project
- tag reference
- instrument_now_in_corpus yes
- corroboration [verified] The adoption date and the 5-2 vote are confirmed from the ordinance and the approved minutes (data/documents/urbana/council/, read in incentive-instruments.yaml). The complaint's CHARACTERIZATION — a district "supporting the Project" — is the pleader's, and the enacted text does not bear it out: Ord. 4631-25 designates an AREA with ceilings, grants nothing, names no project, and its Exhibit B EXCLUDES the two parcels Thor bought first (Urbana Owner I -30-001 and Highland55 -32-005, 133.256 of the assembly's 230.346 ac).
- correction WITHDRAWN (#1354): this entry previously read "Aligns with the Nov-18-2025 Highland55 deed (OR603/1927) in land-assembly.yaml. [inference]". That inference is refuted by the primary instrument — the Highland55 parcel is NOT within Community Reinvestment Area #2. Only the Urbana Owner II parcels (97.09 ac, conveyed 2026-06-12) fall inside it. Do not restate the deed/CRA temporal alignment as evidentiary.
- id Resolution 2727-26 (the Moratorium)
- exhibit 5
- adopted 2026-03-03
- action 12-month emergency moratorium on data-center permits/approvals within the City; took immediate effect
- tag reference
- note First placed on the 2026-02-17 agenda, then removed without a vote (¶60); enacted 2026-03-03. The instrument at the center of Counts III–VII.
- id Resolution 2731-26
- exhibit —
- adopted 2026-05-05
- action Referred to the Planning Commission — initiates permanent removal of data-center use from M-1
- tag reference
- id Ordinance 4635-26
- exhibit 9
- adopted —
- action Would amend M-1 to permanently REMOVE data centers as a permitted use (Planning Commission recommended approval 2026-05-18)
- tag reference
- note Pending — first reading only. The 'permanent' reversal that (with the moratorium) Thor says eviscerates its vested right.
companion_case
- court Champaign County Court of Common Pleas
- posture Administrative appeal (R.C. Ch. 2506) of the BZA's affirmance of the 'incomplete' site-plan determination
- status open
- case_no —
- follow_up watermark-directory/the-watermark-directory#1360
- known_from_complaint Doc #1 ¶¶71–72: Thor appealed the application denial to BOTH the Champaign County Court of Common Pleas AND the BZA (¶71), because the City's actions made it unclear who had denied the application; Thor hand-delivered the BZA appeal on 2026-03-20 (¶72). The Common Pleas filing itself, and its case number, are [open] ingest targets.
open_targets
- Exhibits 1–9 to Doc #1 (the four Apr-2025 ordinances, Res. 2727-26, the counsel letter, the BZA response, the motion for continuance, Ord. 4635-26) — separate ECF attachments; ingest to take the ordinance record [reference] → [verified]. Follow-up: #1359.
- The Champaign County Common Pleas administrative appeal (case number + complaint) — the companion case. Follow-up: #1360.
- Later docket entries in 3:26-cv-00196 (answer, any TRO/PI motion + ruling) — the case is live as of 2026-07-10.
- The City of Urbana minutes/ordinance source for Res. 2727-26 and Ord. 4635-26 — the defendant-side record.
Where it connects
urbana/litigation-thor-v-urbana.yaml · — · urbana