Danopulos v. Am. Trading II, L.L.C.
2021 Ohio 2196
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2021Background
- In 2014 thieves stole multiple pieces of jewelry from Irene Danopulos; a pawnshop, American Trading II, purchased three items (an emerald ring, a brooch, and a diamond bracelet), retained them during the statutory period, then sold them for scrap after disassembling them.
- Danopulos sued American Trading for conversion after the detective traced the stolen items to the pawnshop but the items had already been destroyed and alienated.
- This is the third appeal in the dispute; earlier appellate rulings rejected summary judgment for the pawnshop and held that the pawnshop’s compliance with reporting/retention requirements did not defeat conversion liability once it intentionally destroyed the items.
- On remand the trial court credited plaintiff’s expert (Michael Karaman) over defendant’s evidence and awarded $31,500 for the emerald ring and $8,000 for the brooch, but denied any damages for the bracelet because Karaman had not given a specific valuation for it.
- American Trading appealed, attacking the expert opinion as speculative and arguing damages should be based on the pawnshop’s purchase/sale prices; Danopulos cross-appealed, arguing the court erred in denying any damages for the bracelet.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility/weight of expert appraisal (Karaman) | Karaman is a qualified gemologist whose appraisal (using photos and owner information) reasonably established retail market value. | Karaman’s opinions were speculative, unreliable, and inadmissible given lack of direct inspection and reliance on hearsay. | Expert testimony admissible and credible enough; trial court did not abuse discretion in accepting Karaman’s valuations. |
| Proper measure of damages (retail value vs pawn/scrap prices) | Damages should reflect the retail market (consumer replacement cost) because Danopulos is a retail consumer and lost unique/antique pieces. | Damages should be based on what American Trading paid and received ($2,125 purchase; $7,964.30 resale). | Retail market value, not pawn/scrap prices, is the correct measure; the pawnshop’s scrap sale was unrepresentative. |
| Damages for diamond bracelet without specific expert valuation | Lay testimony that the bracelet contained 10 carats combined with Karaman’s per-carat diamond valuation suffices to prove value to a reasonable certainty. | Plaintiff failed to present specific expert valuation for the bracelet; damages therefore speculative. | Trial court erred in denying all damages for the bracelet; remanded to determine bracelet value (court may use plaintiff’s testimony + Karaman’s per-carat valuation or take new evidence). |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Beasley, 108 N.E.3d 1028 (Ohio 2018) (expert opinion admissible where it is more than mere possibility or speculation)
- Seasons Coal Co., Inc. v. Cleveland, 461 N.E.2d 1273 (Ohio 1984) (trial judge in bench trial best positioned to weigh witness credibility)
- Pruitt v. LGR Trucking, Inc., 774 N.E.2d 273 (Ohio Ct. App.) (measure of damages in conversion is value at time of conversion)
- Akro-Plastics, Inc. v. Drake Indus., 685 N.E.2d 246 (Ohio Ct. App.) (appropriate market depends on the plaintiff’s position in chain — consumers recover retail price)
- Pryor v. Webber, 263 N.E.2d 235 (Ohio 1970) (courts may enhance market value to make plaintiff whole)
- Chukwuani (Austin v. Chukwuani), 80 N.E.3d 1199 (Ohio 2017) (damages need not be proven with mathematical certainty; reasonable certainty suffices)
- Danopulos v. American Trading II, LLC, 69 N.E.3d 157 (Ohio Ct. App.) (prior appellate ruling rejecting summary judgment and holding pawnbroker liability not eliminated by statutory compliance)
- American Trading II, LLC (Supreme Ct. dismissal), 132 N.E.3d 687 (Ohio 2019) (Supreme Court dismissed review as improvidently granted; prior appellate disposition non-precedential for general use)