Ninth District Opinions Released on June 12, 2013

The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Appellate District released six opinions on June 12, 2013. All the opinions were for appeals from Summit County cases. My summaries of the opinions appear below. 

Wilfong v. Petrone, 2013-Ohio-2434 was an appeal from a decision of the Summit County Common Pleas Court granting the defendants a summary judgment. The sole assignment of error was that the trial court was wrong in finding for the defendants on the allegations of breach of contract, fraud, and recission. The complaint was based on a contract between the parties for the purchase of a home. The plaintiffs claimed that they were not told the extent of water intrusion into the home prior to buying it. The Court of Appeals found that the observations of the plaintiffs prior to buying the home as well as disclosure by the defendants in their real estate sale documents were sufficient to put the plaintiffs on notice as to the existence of the water problems in the home's basements. Therefore the trial court was affirmed. 

State v. Turner, 2013-Ohio-2433 affirmed a decision of the Summit County Common Pleas Court convicting the defendant of theft and misuse of credit cards. The opinion by Judge Carr contains an interesting discussion of the difference between the sufficiency of the evidence, which is the issue when a Crim. R. 29 motion is made, and the weight of the evidence. Citing to Ohio Supreme Court opinions Judge Carr points out that when the issue is the sufficiency of the evidence the question is whether the State met is burden of production. When, however, the issue is the manifest weight of the evidence the question is whether the State met its burden of persuasion. 

Tillman v. Hyde Park Condominium #3 Owners’ Assn., 2013-Ohio-2432
reversed a decision from the Summit County Common Pleas Court granting attorney fees to the Owner's Association. The appellate court found that the trial erred when adopting findings of its magistrate because it didn't conduct an independent review as required by Civ. R. 53. Tilman's attorney did not file a transcript with her objections to the magistrate's decision but did file an affidavit. Judge Carr's opinion found that the affidavit was not sufficient because the rule requires a transcript if one is available. Here one was available,but not filed, and therefore the affidavit could not be used as a substitute. When a transcript is not filed, then the trial court must accept the magistrate's factual findings but must still conduct an independent review of the magistrate's legal conclusions. In this case that was not done, so the decision was reversed. 

Magnum Steel & Trading, L.L.C. v. Mink, 2013-Ohio-2431 affirmed in part and reversed in part a decision from the Summit County Common Pleas Court. Mink argued that the trial court should have granted its motion for summary judgment, that the trial court erred when it didn't grant its motion for a directed verdict and for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and that the jury verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence. All of those assignments of error were overruled. Magnum's assignments of error were that the trial court should have granted its motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict apparently on the basis that the jury verdict in its favor on an unjust enrichment claim was inadequate. That assignment of error was rejected. Magnum also argued that the trial court erred in denying a motion for prejudgment interest on its verdict for promissory estoppel. That assignment of error was sustained. 

State v. Hendrix, 2013-Ohio-2430 reversed a decision from the Summit County Common Pleas Court granting a motion to suppress. The Court of Appeals found that the entry of the police into the defendant's home was justified due to exigent circumstances which were that the police were responding to an emergency. In this case the appellate court found that the exception applied and reversed the trial court's decision. 

State v. Hayes, 2013-Ohio-2429 affirmed a decision of the Summit County Common Pleas Court convicting the defendant of multiple counts of felonious assault, having weapons under a disability, improperly discharging a firearm into a habitation, and possession of heroin. The defendant was also convicted of firearm specifications attached to the various counts. He received 18 years in prison. He appealed alleging that the felonious assault convictions were against the manifest weight of the evidence and that the trial court should have found that more offenses were merged for purposes of sentencing. The appellate court rejected both assignments of error.