Lambert's Pop A Top, L.L.C. v. Mills
2017 Ohio 8073
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- In Oct 2015 Lambert’s Pop A Top, LLC and Tammy Lambert bought Mills Tavern and leased the building from Mark and Frances Mills; the written business purchase included inventory and the liquor permit for $25,000, with $10,000 placed in escrow "until liquor license transfer is complete."
- At closing the liquor permit was held by Mike and Wanda Kirby and a liquor-code issue required Attorney General involvement before transfer; no deadline or transfer sequence was specified in the purchase agreement.
- Lambert operated the bar under a management agreement with Kirby while transfer issues were resolved; she claims Mills failed to effect the permit transfer and refused to release escrowed funds.
- Lambert also complained the building roof leaked/collapsed and withheld rent (depositing payments with counsel); Mills counterclaimed for breach of the lease.
- After a bench trial the magistrate ruled for Mills on all claims and awarded $20,800; the trial court overruled Lambert’s objections, adopted the magistrate’s decision, and Lambert appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court applied the correct standard (de novo) in ruling on objections to the magistrate | Lambert: trial court failed to perform independent de novo review and improperly adopted the magistrate’s decision | Mills: trial court reviewed transcript and arguments and properly exercised independent review; adopting the magistrate is not proof of error | Court: no affirmative showing of error; presumes correct standard applied and no abuse of discretion |
| Whether the trial court’s judgment was against the manifest weight of the evidence | Lambert: evidence showed breach of purchase agreement (failure to transfer liquor permit) and landlord breach (roof), so judgment was unsupported | Mills: purchase agreement had no date/sequence for transfer; permit ultimately issued to Lambert; Mills attempted roof repairs; statutory withholding requirements not followed | Court: evidence supports magistrate’s findings; Mills did not breach purchase or lease; withholding rent procedures not met; no manifest miscarriage of justice |
Key Cases Cited
- Eastley v. Volkman, 132 Ohio St.3d 328 (Ohio 2012) (clarifies manifest-weight standard in civil cases)
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio 1997) (criminal manifest-weight standard applied in Eastley)
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (Ohio 1983) (abuse-of-discretion defined)
- Crawford v. Eastland Shopping Mall Assn., 11 Ohio App.3d 158 (10th Dist. 1983) (purpose of accelerated calendar)
- DeSantis v. Soller, 70 Ohio App.3d 226 (10th Dist. 1990) (trial court must conduct de novo review of referee/magistrate report)