Harbor Island Assn., Inc. v. Stecks Buckeye Storage Units, L.L.C.

2021 Ohio 2969 (Ohio Ct. App. 2021) · Ohio Court of Appeals, Sixth Appellate District, Ottawa County · August 27, 2021 · No. OT-20-012

Summary

The Sixth District Court of Appeals of Ohio reversed the Ottawa County Court of Common Pleas’ appointment of a receiver without a hearing in a dispute concerning replacement and cost allocation for the Harbor Island bridge. The appellate court held that unresolved claims remained pending and that the trial court failed to provide adequate notice and an opportunity to be heard. The case was remanded for further proceedings.

Holdings

  1. Because Counts Three, Four, and Five remained pending, the January 2020 judgment did not dispose of the whole merits of the action or a separate and distinct branch of it and therefore was not a final, appealable order under R.C. 2505.02(B)(1).
  2. An order appointing a receiver is a final order affecting a substantial right in a special proceeding, but when additional claims remain pending it is appealable only if the trial court makes an express Civ.R. 54(B) determination that there is no just reason for delay.
  3. A receiver may not lawfully be appointed without notice unless the delay required to give notice would result in irreparable loss. The trial court abused its discretion by granting the emergency motion without a hearing or an opportunity for appellants to respond.
  4. The trial court erred by finding that the Association had the right to replace the bridge when that disputed claim had not been presented for decision and appellants had no opportunity to respond.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the trial court could appoint a receiver under R.C. 2735.01(A)(4) before entry of a final judgment when claims remained pending.
  2. Whether the trial court violated procedural due process by appointing a receiver without notice, a hearing, or an opportunity for appellants to respond.
  3. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by appointing a receiver without clear and convincing evidence of the need for a receiver and by resolving the Association's authority to replace the bridge without notice.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded

Cases Cited (15)

  • State ex rel. O'Malley v. Russo, 156 Ohio St.3d 548, 2019-Ohio-1698, 130 N.E.3d 256, ¶¶ 17-18(followed)
  • Hamilton Cty. Bd. of Mental Retardation & Dev. Disabilities v. Professionals Guild of Ohio, 46 Ohio St.3d 147, 153, 545 N.E.2d 1260 (1989)(followed)
  • State ex rel. Celebrezze v. Gibbs, 60 Ohio St.3d 69, 73, 573 N.E.2d 62 (1991)(followed)
  • Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217, 219, 450 N.E.2d 1140 (1983)(followed)
  • State v. Adams, 62 Ohio St.2d 151, 157, 404 N.E.2d 144 (1980)(followed)
  • Debartolo v. Dussault Moving, Inc., 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 96667, 2011-Ohio-6282, ¶ 8(followed)
  • Hummer v. Hummer, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 96132, 2011-Ohio-3767, ¶ 8(followed)
  • McCarthy v. Anderson, 5th Dist. Licking No. 17 CA 33, 2018-Ohio-1994, ¶ 23(followed)
  • Koehler Bros. v. Swihart, 3d Dist. Hancock No. 5-78-16, 1979 WL 207934 (May 1, 1979)(followed)
  • Railway Co. v. Jewett, 37 Ohio St. 649 (1882), paragraph two of the syllabus(followed)

Showing top 10 of 15.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…