Bryan v. Johnston

SUPREME COURT CASES

Laws-info.com » Cases » Ohio » 7th District Court of Appeals » 2012 » Bryan v. Johnston

Bryan v. Johnston

State: Ohio

Court: Ohio Southern District Court

Docket No: 2012-Ohio-2703

Case Date: 06/12/2012

Plaintiff: Bryan

Defendant: Johnston

Preview:[Cite as Bryan v. Johnston, 2012-Ohio-2703.]
STATE OF OHIO, CARROLL COUNTY
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
SEVENTH DISTRICT
EARL BRYAN, ET AL.,                            )
)
PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES,                          )
)
V.                                             )                                           CASE NO. 11 CA 871
)
EUGENE JOHNSTON, ET AL.,                       )                                           OPINION
)
DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.                         )
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDINGS:                      Civil  Appeal  from  Municipal  Court  of
Carroll County, Ohio
Case No. CVG1100098
JUDGMENT:                                      Affirmed
APPEARANCES:
For Plaintiffs-Appellees                       Attorney Kelley Bryan
Childers and Smith
70 Public Square
P.O. Box 252
Carrollton, Ohio 44615
For Defendants-Appellants                      Eugene Johnston, Pro-se
Angela Arkenburgh, Pro-se
369 South Lisbon Street
Carrollton, Ohio 44615
JUDGES:
Hon. Gene Donofrio
Hon. Joseph J. Vukovich
Hon. Mary DeGenaro
Dated: June 12, 2012

[Cite as Bryan v. Johnston, 2012-Ohio-2703.]
DONOFRIO, J.
{¶1}   Defendants-appellants,  Eugene  Johnston  and  Angela  Arkenbaugh,
appeal from a Carroll County Municipal Court judgment evicting them from the duplex
they had been renting from plaintiffs-appellees, Earl and Tonya Bryan.
{¶2}   On March 14, 2011, appellees filed a forcible entry and detainer action
against appellants.   Appellees alleged that appellants failed to pay the monthly rent
owed to appellees in the amount of $550 and sought to evict appellants.
{¶3}   The parties entered into a settlement agreement on March 30, 2011,
whereby appellants agreed to be evicted on April 13, 2011 at 11:30 a.m.   The court
continued the case until April 20 to determine damages.
{¶4}   Appellants filed a timely notice of appeal on April 4, 2011.
{¶5}   Initially, we should note that  “the first cause of a forcible entry and
detainer action is a final appealable order and the damages portion of the case need
not be decided before the appeal of the eviction.”   Nofzinger v. Blood, 6th Dist. No. H-
03-021, 2004-Ohio-2461, ¶11, citing Skillman et al., v. Browne et al., 68 Ohio App.3d
615, 589 N.E.2d 407 (6th Dist. 1990); Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer Dist. v. Foster
& Kleiser, Div. of Metromedia,  8th Dist. No.52717,  1987 WL  17623  *1  (Sept.  24,
1987).   Thus, the fact that the trial court did not yet rule on the damages cause of
action in this case does not render the eviction judgment a non-final order.
{¶6}   Appellants are proceeding with this appeal pro se.   Their assignment of
error is not actually an assignment of error, but is more a statement of what they
allege occurred:
We appeared in Carroll County Municipal Court on March
30, 2011 for a hearing on case no. CVG1100098.   Earl Bryan et
al. and Eugene Johnston et al. were led to a room with Mike
Durkin, Mediator for Judge Willen, to discuss the case.   Eugene
Johnston et al. showed a copy of the cashed rent check for the
dates of Feb. 1 to March 1 to Mike Durkin.   Mike Durkin advised
us  to  hold  onto  our  documents  and  evidence  until  the  next
hearing, which was scheduled April 13, 2011.

- 2 -
{¶7}   Appellants’ brief fails to include an argument with citations to case law,
statutes, or other authority to support their position in violation of App.R. 16(A)(2)(7).
The brief also has numerous attachments that do not appear anywhere in the record.
In a July 13, 2011 judgment entry, we informed appellants that these attachments are
not evidence and we would only consider evidence that was presented in the trial
court.   Additionally, in their statement of facts, appellants set forth numerous facts
that find no support in the record concerning a bad furnace, mold, and sewage.
{¶8}   A pro se appellant is held to the same obligations and standards set
forth in the appellate rules that apply to all litigants.  Kilroy v. B.H. Lakeshore Co., 111
Ohio App.3d 357, 363, 676 N.E.2d 171 (8th Dist. 1996).   Despite appellants’ lack of
compliance with the Appellate Rules, in the interest of justice, we will consider their
argument.
{¶9}   Appellants’ argument is that their rent was paid current.   They state that
they paid the February 1 to March 1, 2011 rent and appellees cashed the check.
This was the rent that the complaint alleged appellants did not pay.    Appellants
request that we reverse the trial court’s judgment so that the eviction is not in their
names.
{¶10}  Because the judgment entry was entered after mediation and there was
no trial, there is very little factual information before us.   All that can be gleaned from
the record is that appellees filed a complaint alleging appellants failed to pay rent on
the duplex unit they were renting from appellees.    There are also copies of two
checks made out from “Eugene Johnston” to “Earl Bryan” in the amount of $450 each
and dated January 31 and February 28, 2011.   There is no record of any testimony
by any of the parties and there are no factual findings by the trial court.
{¶11}  The agreed judgment entry simply states that eviction is to take place
on Wednesday April 13, 2011, at 11:30 a.m. and that the second cause of action
(damages) is continued until Wednesday April 20, 2011.   All parties and the court
signed the agreed judgment entry.
{¶12}  Settlement  agreements  are  highly favored  as  a  means  of  resolving

- 3 -
disputes. State ex rel. Wright v. Weyandt, 50 Ohio St.2d 194, 197, 363 N.E.2d 1387
(1977). When parties have agreed to settlement terms, the trial court may sign a
journal  entry  reflecting  the  terms  and  may  enforce  the  agreement.    Hughes  v.
Yanikov, 8th Dist. No. 07CA009235, 2008-Ohio-2904, ¶9, citing Brilla v. Mulhearn,
168  Ohio App.3d  223,  859 N.E.2d  578,  2006-Ohio-3816,  ¶20  (9th Dist.).    In an
agreed judgment,
litigants voluntarily terminate a lawsuit by assenting to specified
terms,  which  the  court  agrees  to  enforce as  its  judgment  by
signing  and  journalizing  an  entry  reflecting  the  terms  of  the
settlement  agreement.  Grace  v.  Howell,  2d  Dist.  No.  20283,
2004-Ohio-4120, ¶9.
{¶13}  A court is not bound to conduct an evidentiary hearing prior to signing a
settlement agreement.     Mack v. Polson Rubber Co., 14 Ohio St.3d 34, 470 N.E.2d
902 (1984), at the syllabus.   The court may set aside a settlement agreement only on
the basis  of fraud, duress,  undue  influence,  or a factual dispute  concerning the
existence of the terms of the agreement.   Id.
{¶14}  Appellants have not asserted any of these reasons for setting aside the
settlement  agreement.    Nor  did  they  file  a  motion  to  set  aside  the  settlement
agreement in the trial court.
{¶15}  The parties entered into an agreed judgment entry after engaging in
mediation.    None  of  the  reasons  for  setting  aside  a  settlement  agreement  are
present.   There are very limited facts of record for us to consider.   And appellants
have not advanced any real argument for setting aside the agreement that they
presumably  negotiated  for  in  mediation.     On  our  limited  record,  appellants’
assignment of error is without merit.
{¶16}  For the reasons stated above, the trial court’s judgment is hereby
affirmed.

- 4 -
Vukovich, J., concurs.
DeGenaro, J., concurs.

Download 11-ca-871.pdf