Tod Latell, the former Trumbull County recorder, filed a federal lawsuit against current Recorder Dawn Zinni-Hanni; her husband, 7th District Court of Appeals Judge Mark Hanni; and Trumbull County alleging civil conspiracy, defamation and abuse of political authority or influence.

The lawsuit states the “claims arise from the intentional, illegal, unlawful, willful, wanton, malicious, outrageous, oppressive, recklessly indifferent and/or negligent conduct of the defendants, individually and collectively, who all acted at least in part under color of state law to deprive plaintiff of his civil and constitutional rights and as part of a conspiracy to destroy plaintiff’s personal and business names and reputations and to cause him to suffer as much economic damage and other harm as they could and eliminate him as a potential political opponent to defendant, Dawn Zinni-Hanni in the next election.”

The lawsuit contends Zinni-Hanni and Hanni, both Republicans, violated laws “relating to abuse of political authority or influence” and their conduct “demands that they immediately be removed from their respective offices.”

The lawsuit states that Latell, a Democrat, suffers and continues to suffer “severe, serious and potentially permanent injuries, damages, losses and harm,” including “anxiety, depression, embarrassment, humiliation, emotional distress, mental anguish, psychological trauma, inconvenience and a loss of life’s pleasures,” as well as a violation of his constitutional rights, an invasion of privacy and “a substantial loss of income.”

Zinni-Hanni sent a statement to the media on Jan. 8 along with a letter requesting the state auditor conduct an investigation into the alleged misconduct of Latell and Document Technology Systems, which provides and supports the recorder’s office’s software system. Latell, who served eight years as county recorder, went to work for DTS after losing the November 2024 election to Zinni-Hanni.

Faber’s office reviewed the claims and determined it didn’t meet the criteria for an investigation, according to an auditor spokesperson.

Zinni-Hanni contends after beating Latell that he demanded to be hired for a union-protected $100,000 annually salary job in exchange for agreeing not to run against him. She called it an attempt to “bully and pressure me into hiring him.”

Zinni-Hanni said: “This lawsuit is nothing more than the latest act from Tod Latell, a sore loser who has struggled to accept that a Republican woman and Trump supporter defeated him at the ballot box. What he thought was a political dynasty turned out to be a democracy – and voters made their clear choice.”

She added that Latell’s behavior “constitutes intimidation and extortion. This will be proven. But that’s politics.”

Zinni said she welcomes “the lawsuit and remains confident that the truth will come out. If wrongdoing is confirmed through proper channels, I will pursue all appropriate remedies, including referral for further investigation to a grand jury. I will not be bullied, intimidated or silenced.”

Hanni said: “I look forward to the litigation process and am confident that the facts will speak for themselves.”

In the lawsuit, Latell contends Zinni-Hanni asked people, including Republican Commissioner Denny Malloy, if she should hire Latell and was told to do so. But Latell declined the job “apparently because she was unable or unwilling to meet plaintiff’s terms and conditions,” according to Latell’s lawsuit filed by attorneys George R. Farneth II of Pittsburgh and Shaun Kedir of Beachwood.

Malloy confirmed Thursday he had separate conversations with Zinni-Hanni and Latell about the latter staying at the recorder’s office, but Hanni was skeptical, saying Latell couldn’t be trusted.

DTS hired Latell on Feb. 1, 2025, as an outside sales representative and project manager with no business-related contact with any Trumbull County officials except for one very limited call, according to the lawsuit.

In Zinni-Hanni’s letter to Faber, she wrote that by selecting DTS for records software at the recorder’s office, Latell violated state law prohibiting former public officials from profiting from or representing interests tied to contracts they approved or influenced.

Zinni-Hanni contended in the Jan. 8 letter: “I have reason to suspect that Mr. Latell used his unlawful employment with DTS to interfere with or sabotage recorder’s office systems after I refused to hire him.”

Zinni-Hanni said Thursday that during her first few months in office, she “discovered widespread system failures tied to Document Technology Systems causing delays, disruptions and impacting services to the citizens of Trumbull County.”

After learning Latell was working for DTS, Zinni-Hanni said it raised “serious concerns under Ohio’s revolving door law” and “warranted scrutiny” so she requested the investigation by the state auditor.

“This is exactly what responsible public officials are supposed to do,” Zinni-Hanni said.

Latell’s lawsuit claims Mark Swihart, DTS’s owner and president, placed numerous calls and sent several emails to Zinni-Hanni in which he offered support during her transition to recorder and she never responded.

The lawsuit states: “Needing a scapegoat to deflect public attention from her inability to properly run the recorder’s office, and upset that plaintiff, whose terms and conditions she was unable to meet, had accepted an offer to work for DTS, Zinni quickly turned her ire to plaintiff.”

The lawsuit accuses Hanni of assisting his wife in preparing the letter to Faber.

The lawsuit contends Hanni told a DTS employee at a June 10, 2025, event “about how protective of his wife he is and did so in a threatening manner. Hanni made it clear that he was an Ohio appellate judge and therefore a powerful person and went on to say that if anyone were to do something to harm Zinni, he would do whatever he could to get back at the person who hurt her. Hanni went on to say that he knew his way around the system and was not afraid of exercising his years of experience against people who threatened his family.”

The lawsuit also alleges Hanni “repeatedly threatened Swihart about his business relationship with plaintiff while using a harsh and threatening tone.”

The lawsuit contends Hanni, in the presence of his wife, told Swihart that the two believed Latell “had been actively sabotaging Zinni’s office and DTS was aiding plaintiff with his sabotage efforts. Hanni and Zinni knew and/or should have known that allegation was patently false.”

The lawsuit states Swihart told Zinni-Hanni that the problems her office was having were due mainly to operating system updates the county had recently completed.

The lawsuit alleges: “Hanni then threatened Swihart and DTS with lawsuits based on his falsely asserted belief that it was unprofessional, anti-competitive and illegal for DTS to employ” Latell.

The lawsuit contends the conduct of Hanni and Zinni-Hanni with Swihart “was part of the conspiracy between (the two) to destroy plaintiff’s personal and business names and reputations and to cause him to suffer as much economic damage and other harm as they can and eliminate him as a potential opponent to Zinni in the next election.”

The lawsuit states Zinni-Hanni and Hanni believe “the laws do not apply to them and that blame, diversion and obfuscation for their own shortcomings and general lack of empathy are to be politically rewarded when they, in fact, form the very foundation of character that led to the tortious harm plaintiff has suffered at their hands.”

Hanni said: “I don’t stand behind my wife – I stand in front of her. I will not stand by while she is bullied or intimidated. That said, she is more than capable of defending herself as she has already demonstrated.”

Hanni, who is on the May 5 Republican primary ballot for a different seat on the court of appeals, said: “The timing of this lawsuit is notable. In my view, it reflects political frustration rather than legal merit, and appears to be an attempt to inflict political damage following my wife’s decisive election victory.”

The recorder’s race was the closest among any on the November 2024 general election ballot in Trumbull County with Zinni-Hanni winning by 1.2% over Latell.

The lawsuit alleges that after Zinni-Hanni won election but before she took office, Hanni contacted Malloy telling him to vote against a union contract at the recorder’s office or the judge would find opposition to run against the commissioner, perhaps his wife.

“Mark was mad, but he didn’t threaten me,” Malloy said. “He was upset and he made a case to wait until the new person to come in. But there was no threat.”

The lawsuit claims: “Hanni’s statement and conduct not only violated his oath of office but also constituted an unlawful use of his power as a judge to coerce and control another political figure who had a duty to act in the best interests of the citizens of Trumbull County.”

Malloy said Thursday that the commissioners passed the recorder’s union contract before Zinni-Hanni took office. Malloy said while Hanni had a conversation with him about holding up the contract, Donald P. Scott, an attorney for the couple, contacted him requesting a delay. But Malloy neither Hanni nor anyone else threatened him.

“The transition was smooth,” Malloy said. “Tod was a great recorder and Dawn has become a great recorder.”

Malloy said: “It’s sad this lawsuit is happening. Both Tod and Dawn are good people and capable public servants to the office.”

Hanni said: “Mr. Latell, a staunch Democrat, appears to believe I am a very powerful man. I intend to defend myself fully against these claims and to pursue all appropriate counterclaims.”

The lawsuit lists nine counts against Hanni, Zinni-Hanni and/or the county.

The allegations include abuse of political authority or influence against Hanni and Zinni-Hanni, civil conspiracy by the two, intentional infliction of emotional distress by the two, defamation by the two and Trumbull County, false-light invasion of privacy by all three, tortious interference with employment relationship by all three, and vicarious liability by the county.

Latell requested in excess $75,000 in compensatory damages for each of the nine counts as well as punitive damages, attorneys’ fees, costs and other relief deemed appropriate by the court.