Columbus Check Cashers, Inc. v. Jordan
2014 Ohio 2541
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Columbus Check Cashers, Inc. obtained a judgment against Kimberly A. Jordan in 2006 for $1,200.25 plus interest and costs, which became dormant.
- In 2013, Columbus Check Cashers moved for a conditional order of revivor to revive the dormant judgment; the motion referenced the 2006 judgment.
- The Franklin County Municipal Court denied the motion, citing Franklin County Loc.R. 6.11 which prohibits conditional revivor orders.
- Appellant challenged Loc.R. 6.11 as invalid, arguing it conflicts with R.C. 2325.15 and 2325.17 and permits conditional revivor.
- The issue on appeal is whether Loc.R. 6.11 conflicts with the statutes by not allowing a conditional order of revivor.
- The court held Loc.R. 6.11 does not conflict with the statutes and affirmed the trial court’s denial of a conditional revivor.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Loc.R. 6.11 conflict with R.C. 2325.15/2325.17 by prohibiting conditional revivor? | Columbus Check Cashers argues statutes permit conditional revivor. | Jordan argues Loc.R. 6.11 validly prohibits conditional revivor. | No conflict; Loc.R. 6.11 valid. |
Key Cases Cited
- Jenkins Evangelistic Assn., Inc. v. Equities Diversified, Inc., 64 Ohio App.3d 82 (10th Dist.1989) (recognizes conditional revivor procedure under prior statutes when not superseded by rules)
- McCallister v. Frost, 2008-Ohio-2457 (10th Dist.2008) (courts may promulgate local rules so long as not conflicting with statutes)
- Cassidy v. Glossip, 12 Ohio St.2d 17 (1967) (early articulation on conflicts between statutes and rules of court)
- State ex. rel. MADD v. Gosser, 20 Ohio St.3d 30 (1985) (syllabus: rules must align with statutory commands)