Jayashree Restaurants, L.L.C. v. DDR PTC Outparcel L.L.C., 2016 Ohio 5498

DDR (landlord) and Jayashree Restaurants, LLC (tenant) signed a five-year commercial lease for a Polaris Town Center restaurant in Sept. 2013; rent escalations and CAM/tax pass-throughs were specified.
Jayashree vacated and closed the premises in July 2015; DDR sent notice of default and took possession.
DDR sued (Sept. 2015) for breach and moved for summary judgment (Dec. 2015), seeking $575,189.21 in damages for unpaid and future/accelerated rent and charges; Jayashree opposed but submitted no evidentiary materials.
The trial court granted DDR summary judgment and entered judgment for the $575,189.21 plus interest and costs; Jayashree appealed.
The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded regarding damages, concluding DDR failed to prove the damage amount with reasonable certainty because the record lacked evidence whether DDR relet the premises or otherwise mitigated damages as the lease required.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether DDR proved the specific damage amount ($575,189.21) on summary judgment	DDR presented affidavit, lease, and default notices and sought all sums owed under lease term	Jayashree argued DDR failed to prove the amount and provided no evidentiary basis to show damages with reasonable certainty	Reversed: DDR did not meet its burden because critical information (e.g., reletting, mitigation, deficiency calculation) was missing, so damages award was speculative
Whether DDR satisfied mitigation obligation before recovering accelerated/future rent	DDR treated full remaining lease sums as recoverable without showing reletting efforts	Jayashree argued lease required landlord to use commercially reasonable efforts to mitigate and there was no evidence of such efforts	Court held mitigation is contractually required; absence of any evidence of reletting or mitigation precludes awarding the stated damages (second assignment moot after reversal)

Tokles & Son, Inc. v. Midwestern Indemn. Co., 65 Ohio St.3d 621 (summary-judgment standard)
Harless v. Willis Day Warehousing Co., 54 Ohio St.2d 64 (summary-judgment standard)
Dresher v. Burt, 75 Ohio St.3d 280 (moving party initial burden in summary judgment)
Murphy v. Reynoldsburg, 65 Ohio St.3d 356 (caution and doubts resolved for nonmoving party)
Turner v. Turner, 67 Ohio St.3d 337 (definition of material/genuine issue)
Grafton v. Ohio Edison Co., 77 Ohio St.3d 102 (de novo review on summary judgment)
Akro-Plastic v. Drake Indus., 115 Ohio App.3d 221 (plaintiff must prove nature and extent of damages)
Columbus Fin., Inc. v. Howard, 42 Ohio St.2d 178 (burden to prove damages)
Wagenheim v. Alexander Grant & Co., 19 Ohio App.3d 7 (damages cannot be speculative)
Eastman Kodak Co. v. S. Photo Materials Co., 273 U.S. 359 (reasonable basis of computation sufficient for damages)
TJX Cos. v. Hall, 183 Ohio App.3d 236 (damages may be reasonable estimates but require proof)
Frenchtown Square Partnership v. Lemstone, 99 Ohio St.3d 254 (lessee’s burden to prove mitigation as affirmative defense)
Todd Dev. Co., Inc. v. Morgan, 116 Ohio St.3d 461 (allocation of burdens on summary judgment concerning affirmative defenses)