YOUNGSTOWN — Sarah Brown-Clark, a former Youngstown clerk of courts who lost a civil case against the city seeking back pay, filed a breach-of-implied contract lawsuit over the same issue.

James Vitullo, Brown-Clark’s attorney, wrote in his court filing that his client is seeking a judgment in excess of $25,000, plus interest and costs, and an order requiring the Ohio Public Employees Retirement System to recalculate her benefits.

The case was assigned to Mahoning County Common Pleas Court Judge Maureen Sweeney.

Brown-Clark’s first case, filed Dec. 28, 2023, was a petition for a writ of mandamus. It was dismissed by Mahoning County Common Pleas Court Judge John M. Durkin and then appealed to the 7th District Court of Appeals before being voluntarily dismissed before a decision was reached.

City Law Director Adam Buente said: “The city law department will take the procedural steps necessary to obtain dismissal of the plaintiff’s complaint, just like it did for the same exact lawsuit filed in 2023.”

Brown-Clark, clerk of courts for 24 years until her retirement at the end of 2023, contended the city owes her $28,298 in back pay for the last six years of her term. The city disputed that.

On March 11, 2025, Durkin granted the city’s motion for summary judgment in Brown-Clark’s case.

In his decision, Durkin wrote: “Summary judgment is to be granted when it appears from all the submitted evidentiary materials that reasonable minds can reach only a conclusion adverse to the party opposing the motion.”

Council voted 4-3 on Dec. 20, 2023, against giving Brown-Clark a $7,181 raise for 2023. She filed the lawsuit eight days later.

Acting as her own attorney, Brown-Clark filed an appeal on April 9, 2025, with the 7th District Court of Appeals. But Brown-Clark failed to file a legal brief in a timely manner and with an appeals court magistrate warning her the case would be dismissed, Brown-Clark hired Vitullo as her attorney on July 7.

Vitullo sought to dismiss the appeal on Oct. 14, with the request granted three days later.

Vitullo said at the time of the dismissal request that his client was “pursuing a different avenue” in her claim against the city.

The legal dispute in the first case centered on interpretation of Ohio Revised Code Section 1901.31 regarding clerks of courts and specifically a provision exempting certain cities and counties with populations under 100,000 residents, including Youngstown, from having an appointed clerk of courts and requiring that person be elected.

In Brown-Clark’s first lawsuit, Kevin Daley, her attorney in that case, wrote that Youngstown “is legislatively determined to be a municipality with a population greater than 100,000 for the purpose of calculating the clerk of court’s salary.”

Under that requirement, the clerk of court would get 85% of the municipal court judges’ salary.

But in a March 7, 2024, motion to dismiss that was converted by the court to a motion for summary judgment, Buente wrote the statute states if a city’s population is under 100,000 and its court’s revenue is less than its expenditures “the clerk of court of a municipal court shall receive the annual compensation that the legislative authority prescribes.”

There are exemptions included in the law, but not for Youngstown, Durkin ruled.

Durkin wrote: “The General Assembly had the chance to carve out the same exemption for the Youngstown Municipal Court,” but “expressly chose not to do so. Thus, Youngstown’s clerk of court is not exempted.”

Durkin also agreed with the city that the exemption for Youngstown to have an elected clerk of courts “has nothing to do with the setting of Brown-Clark’s compensation.”

The city pays 60% of the Youngstown clerk of courts’ salary with Mahoning County paying the rest.

The rejected legislation by council would have increased the city’s portion of Brown-Clark’s annual salary from $67,389 to $74,570 in 2024. Overall, her annual salary would have gone from $117,103 to $124,284 that year.

In the first lawsuit, Brown-Clark claimed the city and Finance Director Kyle Miasek improperly froze her salary at the 2018 rate of $67,389. With salary increases under state law, Brown-Clark stated she was owed $28,298 over the six years. The county paid its share of the raises to Brown-Clark during those six years.

In the new lawsuit, Vitullo argues that because Brown-Clark was paid the 85% for 18 years, it resulted “in an implied contract” for her final six years on the job.

He wrote the city “breached the implied contract to pay the defendant 85% of the judge’s salaries.”