Goble v. Grosswiler
2019 Ohio 4443
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background
- In June 2015 Goble and Grosswiler signed a handwritten “Contract for Sale of Personal Property” (land installment style) for a $140,000 purchase price; no attorneys reviewed it.
- The contract called for down payment, monthly payments, and balloon payments; parties disputed the amount Grosswiler actually paid.
- Goble posted a Notice to Leave on April 9, 2018 (a three-day forcible-entry-and-detainer form) alleging default and filed an eviction/forfeiture complaint on May 29, 2018 in Shelby Municipal Court.
- At bench trial the court found Grosswiler had paid about $23,050 since June 2015 (less than 20% of purchase price), ruled the notice was sufficient, and ordered restitution of the property.
- Grosswiler appealed, raising two issues: (1) the three-day notice failed to satisfy R.C. 5313.06’s ten-day notice requirement, and (2) municipal court lacked jurisdiction because he had paid ≥20% of the purchase price, which would require common-pleas foreclosure proceedings under R.C. 5313.07.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Goble) | Defendant's Argument (Grosswiler) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Whether a three‑day R.C. 1923.04 notice satisfied R.C. 5313.06’s ten‑day default notice so court had jurisdiction to seek forfeiture | Goble: the notice put Grosswiler on actual notice of default; vendor waited well beyond three days to file, and vendee suffered no prejudice | Grosswiler: Goble’s three‑day form did not comply with R.C. 5313.06’s ten‑day requirement, and compliance is jurisdictional | Held: The three‑day form was sufficient here—Goble waited 48 days before filing and Grosswiler suffered no prejudice; assignment overruled |
| 2. Whether municipal court lacked jurisdiction because vendee paid ≥20% of purchase price (triggering transfer to common pleas for foreclosure) | Goble: evidence showed Grosswiler paid only ≈$23,050 (<20%), so municipal court retained jurisdiction | Grosswiler: trial evidence showed payments ≥20% (≈$31,000), so case should have been in common pleas under R.C. 5313.07 | Held: Trial court did not err—court excluded unauthenticated payment records, testimony and admissible evidence supported ~$23,050 figure; municipal court jurisdiction affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Am. Servicing Corp. v. Wannemacher, 19 N.E.3d 566 (3d Dist. 2014) (discusses vendor’s right to forfeiture under R.C. 5313.08)
- Eastley v. Volkman, 972 N.E.2d 517 (Ohio 2012) (standard for manifest‑weight review in civil bench trials)
- Seasons Coal Co. v. Cleveland, 461 N.E.2d 1273 (Ohio 1984) (appellate deference to trial‑court factfinding and witness credibility)
- Rigby v. Lake Cty., 569 N.E.2d 1056 (Ohio 1991) (trial court has broad discretion on evidentiary admissibility)
- Knapp v. Edwards Laboratories, 400 N.E.2d 384 (Ohio 1980) (when portions of transcript are omitted, appellate court presumes regularity and affirms)