Summary
The Ohio Eleventh District Court of Appeals affirmed the Girard Municipal Court’s denial of a manufactured home park operator’s forcible-entry-and-detainer and money-damages complaint. The court held that a park operator may not terminate a manufactured home tenant’s month-to-month tenancy without cause through a 30-day notice; under R.C. Chapter 4781, termination generally requires a qualifying material violation and notice allowing an opportunity to remedy it. The court relied on Schwartz v. McAtee and concluded that the appellant had not established a statutory basis for eviction.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether a manufactured-home park operator may terminate a tenant's periodic month-to-month tenancy without cause by serving a 30-day notice and then maintain a forcible-entry-and-detainer action under R.C. 4781.37 and R.C. Chapter 1923.
- Whether the trial court abused its discretion by adopting the magistrate's decision denying the park operator's forcible-entry-and-detainer claim.
Holdings
- Under R.C. Chapter 4781, a manufactured-home park operator may not create a holdover tenancy by serving a 30-day notice to vacate without alleging and providing notice of a qualifying material violation. A tenant becomes subject to forcible entry and detainer as a holdover tenant only when the statutory requirements are satisfied, including a material violation, written notice, and failure to remedy the violation within the specified period.
- The trial court did not abuse its discretion in overruling the objection and adopting the magistrate's decision because the undisputed facts showed that the park operator lacked statutory authority to prevail on its forcible-entry-and-detainer claim.
Key quotations
“Under R.C. Ch. 4781, a manufactured home park owner may not cause a tenant to become a holdover tenant by serving a 30-day notice to vacate the premises unless there is “a material violation of the rules of the manufactured home park, of the department of commerce division of industrial compliance, or of applicable state and local health and safety codes” that the tenant fails to remedy in that 30-day period.” (¶ 2)
“In Schwartz, the Ohio Supreme Court held that R.C. Ch. 5321 “does not govern the relationship between manufactured home park operates and their tenants.”” (¶ 32)
“The result is that a manufactured home park operator cannot maintain a successful “action in forcible entry and detainer against a tenant unless the tenant has defaulted in the payment of rent and/or breached the terms of his rental agreement.”” (¶ 33)
“We therefore conclude that the trial court correctly applied Schwartz and correctly determined that Appellant was without statutory authority to prevail in a forcible entry and detainer action where Appellant failed to allege that Appellee had committed any violation as required by R.C. 4781.45.” (¶ 38)
Factual background
Seal Team 6 purchased a manufactured-home park in Vienna, Ohio, where Ford owned a manufactured home and rented a lot on a month-to-month basis. The park operator posted a 30-day notice terminating the tenancy without stating any specific reason, followed by a three-day notice to leave after Ford remained on the premises. The operator did not allege that Ford violated a park rule, a Division of Industrial Compliance rule, or a state or local health and safety code.
Procedural history
Seal Team 6 filed a forcible-entry-and-detainer and money-damages complaint against Joshua M. Ford in the Girard Municipal Court. After a magistrate found that the park operator had not established a proper basis to terminate Ford's tenancy, the trial court overruled the operator's objection and affirmed the magistrate's decision. The operator appealed, and the Eleventh District affirmed.