2012 Ohio 2922
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- FSD agreed to buy Kirkwood's Solon, Ohio land for $87,500, comprising parcel 14 and the rear of parcel 15, with Kirkwood retaining a 1.0-acre portion of parcel 15.
- To effect the transfer, a lot split was required; FSD paid off the Kirkwoods' existing mortgage and held a $31,000 mortgage on parcel 15 while paying approximately $69,000 for parcel 14.
- Kirkwood conveyed marketable title to parcel 14, began paying mortgage payments to FSD, and sought the lot split for parcel 15.
- Kirkwood sought to have FSD cooperate in obtaining the lot split; FSD later foreclosed on and then dismissed a related mortgage and specific performance action.
- Kirkwood sued on September 22, 2009 for breach of contract, alleging FSD failed to cooperate in obtaining the lot split and consolidation; she sought specific performance or $30,000 in damages.
- After remand from the appellate court, a bench trial in 2011 found a breach but the court could not award damages due to lack of proven fair market value, and the appeal affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether damages were proper for breach of real estate contract | Kirkwood asserts damages should reflect FMV loss from breach. | FSD contends no FMV evidence or adequate valuation was presented to measure damages. | Damages not awarded; lack of FMV proof prevented calculation. |
Key Cases Cited
- Snider-Cannata Interests, L.L.C. v. Ruper, 8th Dist. No. 93401 (2010-Ohio-1927) (damages measured by FMV at breach)
- Roesch v. Bray, 46 Ohio App.3d 49 (6th Dist.1988) (standard for real-property damages)
- Anzalaco v. Graber, 8th Dist. Nos. 96761 and 96787 (2012-Ohio-2057) (elements of breach and damages considerations)