Boyd v. Cogan, 2012 Ohio 1604

Boyd hired Cogan in 2008 to complete a complete rebuild of his dirt-track racecar engine for $10,104.38.
After repair, Boyd’s engine allegedly underperformed; at a later race, oil temperature rose to about 250°; Boyd then had Cropper Automotive rebuild it for $9,657 and later paid about $15,000 for another rebuild when it blew up again.
Boyd filed a four-count complaint on February 12, 2009 seeking recovery of repairs, reimbursement, lost sponsorship, and potential tax benefits.
Three experts testified: Cropper and Swartz for Boyd; Swartz argued Cogan’s work caused the problems while Cropper argued damage to other parts showed issues.
The trial court found in favor of Cogan on all counts, stating Cogan’s work was workmanlike and Boyd failed to mitigate damages; Boyd appealed.
On appeal, Boyd argued mitigation was improperly used as a basis for judgment and that the verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence; the court agreed the mitigation discussion was surplusage and upheld the weight-of-the-evidence ruling

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Mitigation of damages used as basis for judgment	Boyd argues mitigation was not raised or tried	Cogan contends mitigation was tried by implied consent	Mitigation reference is surplusage; no reversal on this issue
Judgment against weight of the evidence	Boyd contends evidence supports judgment for him	Cogan argues evidence supports trial court’s finding	Not against the manifest weight; some competent evidence supports court’s decision

C.E. Morris Co. v. Foley Constr. Co., 54 Ohio St.2d 279 (1980) (standard of review for manifest weight and deference to trial court findings)
Seasons Coal Co. v. Cleveland, 10 Ohio St.3d 77 (1984) (weighing of credibility and deference to trial court findings)