FREMONT, Ohio — A Sandusky County judge seeking re-election in the May 5 Republican primary had a $33,300 state audit finding against him formally abated — with no repayment required — by the county prosecutor who is now publicly supporting his campaign while also running for judge herself, according to government documents reviewed by TiffinOhio.net.
The Ohio Auditor of State’s 2020 audit of Sandusky County identified seven invoices that “were identified and determined to have been manually created by Juvenile Court Judge Brad Smith by his own admission” during an investigation covering the period November 2015 through March 2018. The invoices were made to appear as though they came from two local nonprofits — CASA of Seneca, Sandusky & Wyandot Counties and The Village House — for services the auditor determined those organizations did not provide. Six of the seven corresponding county checks were cashed by the vendors, totaling $33,300.
The Ohio Auditor of State issued Finding for Recovery 2020-001 against Smith and his bonding company, The Cincinnati Insurance Company, jointly and severally, in the amount of $33,300, in favor of the Sandusky County General Fund.
That finding was never repaid. Instead, Sandusky County Prosecutor Beth Tischler, acting as legal counsel for the county, formally offered a full abatement of the entire finding pursuant to O.R.C. 117.33 — making the amount to be collected $0. The abatement was approved by the Ohio Attorney General’s Office in an April 5, 2023, letter from Senior Assistant Attorney General Shelley Goodrich. “The Finding for Recovery issued against you in the amount of $33,300.00 has been abated pursuant to R.C. 117.33,” Goodrich wrote. “No monies are due with respect to this matter.” Smith signed the abatement agreement on April 24, 2023. Tischler signed it on May 11, 2023, in her capacity as legal counsel for Sandusky County. The abatement agreement specifies that Tischler did not represent Smith personally in the matter, and that Smith chose to proceed without independent counsel.
The Ohio Auditor of State’s online findings database reflects the finding as resolved with a $0 balance. That entry reflects the abatement, not a payment by Smith.
Smith is currently serving as judge of the Sandusky County Court of Common Pleas, Probate and Juvenile Division, a position he has held since 2009, and is seeking re-election in the May 5 primary. Tischler is also on the May 5 ballot, running in the Republican primary for the General Division of the Sandusky County Court of Common Pleas, where she is challenging incumbent Judge Jeremiah Ray. Campaign signs for both candidates have been displayed together publicly, and Smith has solicited yard sign hosts for both races on social media.
In response to a request for comment, Smith disputed the auditor’s characterization of the invoices. “I take issue to the auditor’s characterization of me admitting to creating or falsifying the invoices,” Smith wrote, “as I have maintained consistently that I merely updated prior invoices in order to reflect the amount budgeted by the commissioners for that year … which has been proven.” Smith wrote that his office “no longer does this,” but added that updating prior invoices in that manner “is still routine in other offices across the county… with no apparent concerns by others.” Smith also confirmed that no repayment was made, writing that “the attached abatement agreement spells out and verifies all that I am stating.”
The signed abatement agreement contains a notable admission regarding the conduct of former Sandusky County Prosecutor Timothy Braun. The agreement identifies Braun by name, stating that it was Braun who designated the State Attorney General as Special Prosecutor to review the matter. Item 17 of the agreement states that “The Sandusky County Prosecutor was consulted by Judge Smith on the underlying matters at various points during the pendency of the investigation and ongoing payments, and despite the clear conflict of interest, it was not disclosed in any manner, and legal advice, counsel, and assistance was given to Judge Smith by the Prosecutor.” Item 18 states that Smith “relied upon and followed this advice of counsel, which had the practical impact of allowing and continuing the payments, and ultimately increasing the dollar amount of payments now in contention in the finding for recovery.”
A March 6, 2023, letter requesting AG approval of the abatement — signed by Tischler, Sandusky County Sheriff Christopher Hilton, County Auditor Jerri Miller, and County Commissioners Charles Schwochow, Russ Zimmerman, and Scott Miller — went further, characterizing Braun’s conduct as going “well beyond the clear and obvious conflict of interest to something that appears more intentional and nefarious.” The letter states that Braun appeared to “target” Smith “on numerous occasions for inappropriate or retaliatory reasons, which were misrepresented to investigators.” In his written response to TiffinOhio.net, Smith wrote that Sheriff Hilton could verify that Braun, “when prosecutor, attempted to initiate multiple other simply bizarre allegations against me… again, all unfounded, and all disproved… based upon retaliation.”
The overlapping relationships between Smith and Tischler extend into a separate ongoing legal matter. Smith testified as a character witness in Ohio Supreme Court Board of Professional Conduct disciplinary proceedings against Sandusky County Common Pleas Judge Jon Ickes, Case No. 2024-032. In that testimony, Smith described Ickes as “a solid human being and a good judge” and attributed courthouse tensions entirely to Judge Jeremiah Ray, Ickes’ colleague on the General Division bench, calling that dynamic “a one sided problem.” Disciplinary counsel challenged that characterization in post-hearing briefs, writing that Smith “seemed to minimize respondent’s conduct,” and noted that Smith acknowledged he lacked firsthand knowledge of the day-to-day interactions in Ickes’ chambers. Counsel also quoted Smith’s own admission from the stand: “I still don’t know as I sit here today, what is quite factual and accurate and what might be twisted or exaggerated.” In his response to TiffinOhio.net, Smith said he testified “under a subpoena” and that his comments about courthouse tensions were made “in a greater context of the question, and previous questions… and was related to that point in time… and not related to the original allegations.”
Tischler also testified in the Ickes proceedings — called as a witness by disciplinary counsel, the party bringing the case against Ickes. During cross-examination, she rated Ickes a nine out of ten as a trial judge. It was Ray — the same judge Tischler is now challenging in the May 5 primary — who first brought the underlying Ickes allegations to Tischler on April 29, 2024, contacting her in her capacity as statutory counsel for the court. Ray’s involvement in the courthouse’s recent history extends further: on December 31, 2019, it was Ray who suspended Braun from the prosecutor’s office, one day after Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost filed a complaint seeking Braun’s removal following Braun’s conviction on a negligent assault charge. Tischler was appointed to replace Braun by the Sandusky County Republican Central Committee on February 18, 2020. Disciplinary counsel has sought a two-year suspension with one year stayed; Ickes’ attorneys have asked for a fully stayed 12-month suspension. The matter remains pending before the Ohio Supreme Court.
Tischler did not respond to a request for comment by deadline. The primary election is Tuesday, May 5.
