Combs v. Sherwin-Williams Co.

Summary

The Eighth District Court of Appeals of Ohio affirmed a civil-contempt order against Brett Combs for failing to comply with an agreed order requiring removal and nondisclosure of The Sherwin-Williams Company's information from his website. The court held that the May 1, 2025 order was an enforceable agreed or consent order rather than a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction subject to the requirements of Civ.R. 65. The court also concluded that Combs received adequate notice and a meaningful opportunity to defend against the contempt motion.

Holdings

1. The May 1, 2025 order was an agreed order reflecting the parties' interim agreement, and it was enforceable as both a contract between the parties and an order of the court.
2. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by finding Combs in contempt because Sherwin-Williams established the existence of the order, Combs's knowledge of it, and his violation, while Combs did not rebut the showing or establish an affirmative defense.
3. Combs's due-process rights were not violated because he received notice of the show-cause motion, a reasonable opportunity to defend or explain the allegations in writing and at the hearing, and the opportunity to testify and call witnesses.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the May 1, 2025 order was an agreed or consent order enforceable through contempt rather than a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction subject to Civ.R. 65 requirements.
2. Whether the contempt order was void because the underlying agreed order allegedly lacked notice, a hearing, specificity, findings, or sufficient limits on the restrained conduct.
3. Whether Combs received due process before being held in civil contempt.
4. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by finding Combs in contempt for failing to comply with the May 1, 2025 order.

Disposition

affirmed