The Supreme Court of Ohio has rejected Lordstown’s request to dismiss a lawsuit involving a developer of data centers aligned with the artificial intelligence industry.

In an order dated Dec. 24, the court gave Lordstown and Kellie D. Bordner, its planning and zoning administrator, 14 days to answer Bristolville 25 Developer LLC’s complaint. However, the court dropped attorney Matthew M. Ries, the village’s solicitor, from the suit filed Nov. 12.

“It’s a win for Bristolville in the sense that the village asked the court to dismiss Bristolville’s lawsuit, and the court declined to do so,” said attorney Cary M. Snyder, whose law firm Taft represents Bristolville. “The court wants more information.”

Bristolville, headquartered in New York, approached the village in late October with a proposal for a $3.6 billion, 1.65 millionsquare-foot development in the village and a portion of Jackson Township in Mahoning County.

As the case moves through the docket, Bristolville 25 Developer LLC said it discussed the project with village representatives twice in December.

“We stand ready and able to be a willing partner with the village on this project, as we have from Day 1,” Snyder said. “That position has not changed.”

Bristolville initially touted the economic boost the project would bring including $10.8 million to update Lordstown’s water system, a community fund, the employment of 1,600 construction laborers and 120 full-time workers at the center, and tax revenue.

Shortly afterward, village council voted to ban the centers.

Bristolville maintained its proposal predated the ban and that Lordstown, specifically Bordner, failed to initiate the site plan review process. Bristolville, joined by property owner BHGH Properties LLC, Hudson, asked the Supreme Court to order Lordstown to perform its governmental duties.

Lordstown backtracked from the ban Dec. 1 when council members repealed the legislation. They also tabled a plan to institute a 180-day moratorium issuing data center permits. However, a public hearing at 5:30 p.m. Jan. 5 will address the proposed moratorium.

Council is expected to act on the proposal after the hearing.

Snyder said that on Dec. 5 the engineers for the developer and the village held a conference call to discuss the center’s proposed water usage. A day before the court’s order, Bristolville submitted additional information.

Bristolville is awaiting a work authorization from the village.

“As part of our submission on Dec. 23, we reminded the village that we don’t yet have that,” Snyder said. “In terms of ‘Where does the project stand?’ Bristolville continues to move forward with the process.”

Snyder said he spoke to Ries last week on matters outside of the current litigation.

“So there is a dialogue there,” he said.

Considering the court’s order and the interactions between the village and Bristolville, Snyder said he sees an opportunity to resolve the legal dispute.

“The relief we asked for is that Bristolville’s project be evaluated under the zoning law as it existed when we first started the process,” he said. “Maybe there is some movement for a settlement outside of litigation. We’re still seeing what that looks like.

“But we’ve also received no guarantee from the village that they would evaluate Bristolville’s project under existing zoning law. So this is all kind of new with the Dec. 24 order.”

Snyder said he has not spoken to Ries about the court’s newest order.

“We’re certainly willing to discuss a resolution to the litigation,” he said. “To be fair to the village, we haven’t reached out or offered anything.”