Basinger v. York, 2012 Ohio 2017

York appeals a small-claims judgment awarding Basinger $509.99.
York counterclaimed for return of specific property: one varmint caller and two jack stands.
Trial court ruled for Basinger; York received nothing on counterclaim.
Court analyzes subject-matter jurisdiction of small-claims court over replevin claim.
Court holds small-claims lacked jurisdiction over replevin; entire case should be dismissed; remand with Civ.R.12(H)(3) dismissal.
Court notes compulsory nature of counterclaims and lack of transfer authority when jurisdiction is lacking.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the small-claims court had jurisdiction over the replevin counterclaim.	Basinger contends lack of jurisdiction over counterclaim.	York contends counterclaim falls within permissible small-claims scope.	Trial court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction; must dismiss
Whether the case should be dismissed entirely or merely the counterclaim.	Basinger emphasizes Civ.R.12(H)(3) requires dismissal for lack of jurisdiction.	York's counterclaim should be resolved within the same proceeding.	Because counterclaim caused lack of jurisdiction, entire case must be dismissed
Whether the case should have been transferred to regular docket.	Not explicitly argued in opinion.	Transfer not available when subject-matter jurisdiction is lacking.	No transfer; dismissal appropriate

Heisler v. Heisler, 4th Dist. No. 09CA12, 2010-Ohio-98 (2010) (defines subject-matter jurisdiction; court may raise sua sponte)
State ex rel. Tubbs Jones v. Suster, 84 Ohio St.3d 70, 701 N.E.2d 1002 (1998) (1998) (jurisdiction principles referenced by appellate review)
Brown v. E. Ohio Gas Co., 2011-Ohio-6443 (2011) (appellate reviewability of jurisdiction issues)
State ex rel. White v. Cuyahoga Metro. Hous. Auth., 79 Ohio St.3d 543, 684 N.E.2d 72 (1997) (1997) (sua sponte consideration of jurisdiction)
Eicher v. Eicher, 2010-Ohio-3784 (2010) (Civ.R. 12(H)(3) dismissal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction)