Henricksen v. Henricksen
2017 Ohio 9050
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- In Nov. 2015 Eunicee Henricksen sued Robert (her then-husband), and his parents Tim and Geri, for assault (against Robert), retaliatory eviction/interference with a witness (against Tim & Geri), and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Robert had been criminally convicted for the underlying assault.
- Tim and Geri owned the residence; they evicted Eunicee and had a separate municipal eviction action and counterclaim for unpaid rent and damages.
- The parties executed a written settlement on March 9, 2016 in the domestic-relations case (identifying Plaintiff, Defendant, and Third-Party Defendants). The settlement included a general release of claims "between Plaintiff and Third Party Defendants" and released "Released Parties" (including "heirs, relatives").
- Defendants moved for summary judgment in Nov. 2016, asserting accord and satisfaction/settlement; Robert supplemented with an affidavit authenticating the settlement. Appellees Tim & Geri had not formally amended their answer to plead accord and satisfaction.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for all appellees. On appeal the Seventh District affirmed summary judgment as to Tim & Geri, but reversed as to Robert and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the affirmative defense of accord and satisfaction should be struck for failure to plead it | Henricksen: defense waived because not pled in answers; must be stricken under Civ.R. 8(C)/Jim's Steak House | Defendants: settlement executed after answers; court may allow amendment and consider defense in summary judgment context | Court: No reversible error — amendment was implicitly allowed as to Robert; failure to formally amend by Tim & Geri did not prejudice plaintiff given facts and posture, so defense not stricken here |
| Whether the settlement/release bars the claims in this civil suit against Tim & Geri | Henricksen: release limited to domestic-relations case or is ambiguous — requires jury/extra‑record evidence | Tim & Geri: release unambiguously covers all known/unknown claims through the execution date, including torts related to eviction | Court: Release language was clear and unambiguous as to Tim & Geri; summary judgment affirmed for them |
| Whether the settlement/release bars the assault claim against Robert (son) | Henricksen: release did not intend to release claims against Robert; not listed as released party for purposes of tort claim | Robert: he signed settlement and is a "relative"/"released party," so release covers him | Court: Release did not unambiguously release claims against Robert; named him as a party to the domestic-relations settlement but the release was intended to resolve claims asserted by/against Tim & Geri — summary judgment reversed as to Robert |
| Whether Robert’s affidavit/authentication of the settlement was admissible summary judgment evidence | Henricksen: implied challenge to admissibility | Robert: affidavit establishes the attached settlement is a true copy and he has personal knowledge; Civ.R.56(E) satisfied | Court: Henricksen did not object to the form; Robert’s affidavit was sufficient; evidence properly considered; no error |
Key Cases Cited
- Jim's Steak House, Inc. v. City of Cleveland, 81 Ohio St.3d 18 (addresses requirement to plead affirmative defenses under Civ.R. 8(C))
- Continental W. Condominium Unit Owners Assn. v. Howard E. Ferguson, Inc., 74 Ohio St.3d 501 (settlement agreements are enforceable contracts)
- Comer v. Risko, 106 Ohio St.3d 185 (standard of review for summary judgment)
- Aultman Hosp. Assn. v. Community Mut. Ins. Co., 46 Ohio St.3d 51 (interpretation of unambiguous contract language)
- Illinois Controls, Inc. v. Langham, 70 Ohio St.3d 512 (parol/extrinsic evidence admissible when contract ambiguous)
- Spier v. American Univ. of the Caribbean, 3 Ohio App.3d 28 (Civ.R.56(C) list of proper summary judgment materials)