Burton Carol Mgt., L.L.C. v. Tessmer, 2015 Ohio 4321

Burton Carol Management sued Carolyn Tessmer in Mentor Municipal Court for forcible entry and detainer seeking past-due rent and related charges.
Tessmer proceeded pro se, filed multiple motions and counterclaims; counterclaims were dismissed with prejudice before trial.
Tessmer requested a jury; the court granted the request but ordered a $125 jury deposit; Tessmer failed to pay and the case was tried to the bench.
A magistrate awarded Burton Carol $734 for past-due rent plus $115 cleaning charges (total $849); the trial court adopted the magistrate’s decision after Tessmer’s objections.
Tessmer appealed pro se but did not file a transcript; her App.R. 9 narrative statement was stricken for noncompliance, limiting appellate review.
The appellate court affirmed, rejecting Tessmer’s claims (including alleged fraud, constitutional violations, and a water-utility claim) largely because the record did not support them and due to the absence of a transcript or compliant statement.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Right to jury trial when unable to pay advance jury deposit	Court may require deposit; local rules valid	Denial of jury by converting to bench violated constitutional rights for indigent pro se litigant	Deposit requirement is permissible; failure to pay justified bench trial (R.C. and Walters v. Griffith)
Alleged attorney/judicial collusion and fraud	No fraud; judgment reflects regular adjudication	Counsel and judges conspired to deprive rights and profit	Allegations unsupported and conclusory; claim rejected
Tenant’s claimed right to public water supply / improper utility charge	Landlord lawfully billed for utilities as alleged	Tenant asserted a federal property/water right and improper third-party billing	Record insufficient (no transcript); appellate court presumed regularity and declined review
Challenge to magistrate’s adoption and judgment as against weight of evidence and obtained by fraud	Judgment is lawful and supported by proceedings	Decision was fraudulent and violated due process	Without a transcript or valid App.R. 9 statement, appellate review is precluded; judgment affirmed

Walters v. Griffith, 38 Ohio St.2d 132 (1974) (upholding local rules requiring jury fee deposit as reasonable regulation of jury right)
Pernell v. Southall Realty, 416 U.S. 363 (1974) (Seventh Amendment preserves jury trials in certain landlord-tenant/property recovery disputes)
State ex rel. Motley v. Capers, 23 Ohio St.3d 56 (1986) (App.R. 9(C) narrative statement is an available alternative to a transcript for indigent appellants)
Griffin v. Illinois, 351 U.S. 12 (1956) (due process considerations regarding appellate review for indigent defendants)