Dottore Company Ordered to Repay Couple Over Receiver Fees

The Cuyahoga County Justice Center in an undated photo. Credit: Tim Evanson

The court-appointed receiver at the center of the legal troubles with Cuyahoga County Domestic Relations Judge Leslie Ann Celebrezze was ordered to repay hundreds of thousands of dollars for unauthorized expenses and overbilling a Strongsville couple.
In a June 10 order, visiting Judge Debra Boros told receiver Mark Dottore that he could only bill Jason and Crystal Jardine about $205,000 for running their businesses as a court-appointed receiver during their divorce.

Celebrezze has admitted to steering lucrative cases to Dottore. She approved nearly $500,000 in fees for his company, Dottore Cos. LLC, between January 2017 and June 2023, The Marshall Project – Cleveland reported.

Dottore must repay the money within 90 days, the judge ruled. Dottore said he will appeal the ruling. Celebrezze did not respond to a request for comment.

Receivers are meant to be a neutral party assigned to handle marital property such as real estate, cash and businesses in contested cases.

The judge’s ruling also said the tens of thousands of dollars paid to a law firm that Dottore selected were not authorized in the receivership order and that neither the couple nor Dottore are responsible for the fees.

Celebrezze, Dottore and Dottore Cos. LLC are also the targets of an FBI and federal grand jury investigation. The judge also faces a yearlong suspension by the Ohio Supreme Court’s Disciplinary Counsel. Celebrezze has admitted in court papers to being in love with Dottore.

Celebrezze’s troubles started after The Marshall Project – Cleveland in 2023 investigated the ties between her and Dottore, a lifelong friend.

When state judges appoint receivers, no oversight agency exists to monitor their work. In Cuyahoga County, the billing invoices are not listed on the court’s online docket. People must spend hours — as The Marshall Project – Cleveland did — to compile the totals.

Boros’ order is filled with phrases like “not a reasonable expense” and “outside the authority of the receivership order.”

For one $31,000 expense, Boros found that four individuals were being paid to do the same work and so the fees were unreasonable.

This article was first published by The Marshall Project, a nonprofit news organization covering the U.S. criminal justice system. Sign up for their newsletters, and follow them on Instagram, TikTok, Reddit and Facebook