Summary
The Ohio Court of Appeals, Eighth District, affirmed summary judgment for the City of Cleveland in a dispute involving water billing for a condominium association. The court held that Cleveland Codified Ordinance 535.30 did not require separate billing for each condominium unit where the property had one service line, meter, shut-off valve, and account. The court also upheld summary judgment on the City's counterclaim for a delinquent balance of $194,432.43, finding no competent evidence that the meter readings or billing were inaccurate.
Holdings
- Cleveland Ordinance 535.30 does not require the City to bill each condominium unit separately where the development has one service line, one meter, one shut-off valve, and one account held by the association. The association is the customer contracting for water service, and the property is properly billed as a single account.
- Summary judgment for the City on its counterclaim was proper because the association presented no competent evidence creating a genuine issue of material fact regarding the accuracy of the meter readings or the $194,432.43 delinquent balance.
Questions Presented
- Whether Cleveland Ordinance 535.30 requires the City to bill each condominium unit separately when the development has one service line, one meter, and one water account.
- Whether the association presented competent evidence creating a genuine issue of material fact concerning the accuracy of the water-meter readings or the $194,432.43 balance owed on the City's counterclaim.
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (7)
- Grafton v. Ohio Edison Co., 77 Ohio St. 3d 102, 105, 671 N.E.2d 241 (1996)(followed)
- State ex rel. Zimmerman v. Tompkins, 75 Ohio St. 3d 447, 449, 663 N.E.2d 639 (1996)(followed)
- State ex rel. Savarese v. Buckeye Local School Dist. Bd. of Edn., 74 Ohio St. 3d 543, 545, 660 N.E.2d 463 (1996)(followed)
- State ex rel. Herman v. Klopfleisch, 72 Ohio St. 3d 581, 584, 651 N.E.2d 995 (1995)(followed)
- State ex rel. Celebrezze v. Bd. of Cty. Commrs., 32 Ohio St. 3d 24, 27, 512 N.E.2d 332 (1987)(followed)
- Slingluff v. Weaver, 66 Ohio St. 621, 64 N.E. 574 (1902)(followed)
- State ex rel. Toledo Edison Co. v. Clyde, 76 Ohio St. 3d 508, 513, 668 N.E.2d 498 (1996)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…