D'Amore v. Mathews
952 N.E.2d 1212
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- D’Amore sues Matthews as executor and the Crow estate for breach of contract and promissory estoppel arising from a 1995 contract.
- The 1995 contract promised D’Amore $300,000 in value, a minimum 15% profit interest, and reimbursement of expenses; no equity in Parkwood was granted.
- Crow formed Parkwood Ltd. in 1998 and later transferred properties to Parkwood, without granting D’Amore equity.
- In 2003 Crow transferred assets (including Parkwood interest) to the J. Harvey Crow Trust, making the trust the majority owner of Parkwood; Crow died in 2004 and Matthews was appointed executor.
- D’Amore filed an amended complaint in October 2010; Matthews moved to dismiss as time-barred under RC 2117.06; the court granted the motion in September 2010.
- The court dismissed the complaint on statute-of-limitations grounds, and the verdicts were appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether RC 2117.06 bars the claims | D’Amore argues statute limitations do not apply to her contract/promissory-estoppel claims. | Matthews contends all claims against the estate must be presented within six months after death. | Yes; RC 2117.06(B)-(C) bars the claims as untimely. |
| Whether contract claims fall under 2305.07 or 2305.06 | D’Amore argues general contract limitations apply (6 or 15 years). | Matthews maintains the estate-based limitations govern. | Misplaced reliance; claims accrue as estate debts and fall under RC 2117.06. |
| Whether personal jurisdiction was waived and could be raised sua sponte | No waiver; Matthews did not preserve lack of personal jurisdiction defense. | Matthews did not object in pleadings, but the court addressed jurisdiction. | Waiver occurred; court cannot raise lack of personal jurisdiction sua sponte after waiver. |
| Whether promissory estoppel was adequately pled | Promissory estoppel grounds supported by the 1995 agreement terms. | No independent reliance on promises apart from the 1995 contract; equitable relief not warranted. | Promissory estoppel claim inadequately pled; no independent reliance. |
Key Cases Cited
- HAD Ents. v. Galloway, 192 Ohio App.3d 133 (2011-Ohio-57) (promissory-estoppel and contract principles in Ohio appellate context)
- Snyder Computer Sys., Inc. v. Stives, 2008-Ohio-1192 (8th Dist. 2008) (waiver principles; lack of personal-jurisdiction defense not timely raised)
- Gliozzo v. Univ. Urologists of Cleveland, Inc., 114 Ohio St.3d 141 (2007-Ohio-3762) (personal jurisdiction waiver and procedural proper-raise rules)
- U.S. Bank Natl. Assn. v. Golf Course Mgt, Inc., 2009-Ohio-2807 (2009-Ohio-2807) (defense waiver in civil cases; jurisdiction-not-raised rule)