Canton v. SPBC, L.L.C.
2021 Ohio 2368
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2021Background
- Canton sued SPBC, LLC and others for unpaid employee withholding taxes, interest, and penalties.
- Parties executed a Settlement Agreement: Canton would accept $15,000 in two equal installments (due Mar. 31, 2018 and July 4, 2018); Agreement reserved Canton’s right to pursue legal remedies on default.
- Canton filed a dismissal with prejudice that expressly stated the court retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement.
- SPBC paid the first $7,500 installment but defaulted on the second; Canton moved to reinstate and later filed for summary judgment enforcing the original civil claim.
- Trial court vacated the dismissal, reinstated the case, denied SPBC’s motion to strike, granted Canton’s summary judgment, and entered final judgment for Canton (total judgment minus the $7,500 payment).
Issues
| Issue | Canton’s Argument | SPBC’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court properly vacated the dismissal and reinstated the case | Canton argued the settlement expressly reserved Canton’s right to pursue legal remedies on default and the dismissal preserved the court’s jurisdiction to enforce the agreement | SPBC argued an executory settlement prevents pursuing the original claim and that vacating the dismissal was improper | Court held vacatur and reinstatement were proper because the dismissal expressly retained jurisdiction and the Agreement reserved remedies on default |
| Whether summary judgment for Canton was proper (i.e., whether Canton could proceed on its original claim after settlement default) | Canton argued the Agreement permitted it to pursue all legal remedies on default, including reinstating the underlying litigation | SPBC argued the executory settlement merged original claim and limited Canton to enforcing the settlement only | Court held summary judgment was proper: Agreement’s plain language allowed Canton to pursue legal remedies, and SPBC failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact |
Key Cases Cited
- Infinite Sec. Solutions, L.L.C. v. Karam Props. II, 143 Ohio St.3d 346 (2015) (court retains jurisdiction to enforce settlement only if dismissal incorporates terms or expressly reserves jurisdiction)
- Smiddy v. The Wedding Party, Inc., 30 Ohio St.3d 35 (1987) (standard of appellate review for summary judgment)
- Grafton v. Ohio Edison Co., 77 Ohio St.3d 102 (1996) (summary judgment reviewed de novo)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) (moving party’s burden in summary judgment proceedings)
- Dresher v. Burt, 75 Ohio St.3d 280 (1996) (allocation of burdens on summary judgment in Ohio)
- Temple v. Wean United, Inc., 50 Ohio St.2d 317 (1977) (requirements for granting summary judgment)
- Williams v. First United Church of Christ, 37 Ohio St.2d 150 (1974) (viewing record in light most favorable to nonmoving party on summary judgment)
- Bd. of Commrs. of Columbiana Cty. v. Samuelson, 24 Ohio St.3d 62 (1986) (an executory settlement substitutes new obligations for original claims)