Ellen Shepherd said she wants a building permit to repair 199 Sea Lion Dr., Mayville. However, she said the village won’t issue one because they say it should be torn down. P-J file photo by Gregory Bacon

MAYVILLE — A Warren woman is asking state Supreme Court Justice Grace Hanlon to reconsider her decision to allow the village of Mayville to secure a problem property on Sea Lion Drive.

Hanlon ruled in June that Ellen Shepherd’s failure to appear at a court hearing prompted Hanlon to side with the village in part by allowing Mayville officials to take action against the property, though Hanlon stopped short of allowing the village to demolish the property. Instead, Hanlon ordered another court date later this year.

“It is hereby ordered that the defendant is in default,” Hanlon wrote in her June 10 order. “It is further ordered that the plaintiff be allowed to enter onto the premises of the defendant, known as 199 Sea Lion Drive, Mayville, … for the purposes of securing the property by boarding it and taking whatever actions necessary to make the property safe and bait the current nuisance.”

A few days after Hanlon’s ruling, Shepherd filed a motion for reconsideration. Shepherd, who said she is representing herself in court, said in the motion she answered the complaint within 30 days as Hanlon requested but had not received an order from the court confirming the court she missed.

“Plaintiff relies on the good faith of the court for court notices that issue instructions,” Shepherd wrote. “Plaintiff relies on the good faith of the court to count the 30 days and discount Memorial Day as a federal holiday when the court does not conduct business. Instead, the 30 days were counted as calendar days only and plaintiff immediately rejected defendant’s answers to the complaints and returned it to defendant. Defendant is representing herself and relies on the court to give clear directions in writing. Defendant also relies on justice which requires and prays that this motion to reconsider is considered.”

Village officials filed a lawsuit in state Supreme Court in late December citing 21 separate violations of village code for property maintenance, with many of the violations existing for years despite numerous citations from both the village and the town of Chautauqua. The property was condemned in 2021.

Frank Watson, Chautauqua and Mayville code officer, sent a letter to Shepherd in July 2023 stating he had received complaints from neighbors about the property that included concerns the cabin was unsafe, unsecured and had numerous pests. That letter states the structure was open at all window and door areas, the interior had exposed framings with several areas described as damaged and defective. The crawl space floor area was exposed and Watson said the structural integrity of the building was questionable in several areas. Watson also noted that there was evidence of pest entry and activity throughout the home while the exterior property landscape was overgrown and not maintained adequately on the day of his inspection.

The documents additionally state that the premises “have caused and threaten to cause other properties in the village to be damaged and depreciated in value as well as injured and threaten to injure the health of the citizens of the village and have interfered with and threaten to interfere with the reasonable, proper and orderly residential and business development in the village.”

Shepherd’s initial response, filed June 6, asks Hanlon to dismiss the case with prejudice. She also asks the judge to require Mayville to reimburse her for out-of-pocket costs and the costs of increased construction caused by what Shepherd said is unnecessary obstruction by the village.

She also took issue with Code Enforcement Officer Frank Watson’s work, saying the notices of code violations aren’t specific enough and also saying an engineering firm hired by Shepherd found the violations cited by Watson aren’t valid. Shepherd’s answer to the village’s lawsuit lays blame at village officials for denial of several applications for a building permit while arguing the village has overstated the number of times the property has been cited for code violations. She also argues there is no proof of rodent infestations.

The same day Shepherd asked Hanlon to reconsider her early June decision, the Warren resident also filed a motion to dismiss the case against her. Shepherd says the village has ignored her rights as a property owner, including sending her tax bills to Shepherd’s former address in Virginia while sending all other notices to a different local address. She also says the village hasn’t given her timely notice nor answered her request for “the Mayville property rules for any matter for which defendant has requested.”

“The plaintiff is abusing the purpose of the court and abusing citizens’ rights, which includes the defendant’s, and prays the court rejects his complaint in the same way plaintiff has rejected the defendant’s rights,” Shepherd wrote.