Mills Fence Co., Inc. v. Witter
2017 Ohio 8381
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- The Witters contracted Mills Fence to install a fence, later withholding $4,300 for unsatisfactory work; Mills Fence filed suit and placed a $4,300 mechanic’s lien.
- The Witters moved to post a bond to release the lien; the trial court ordered an $8,600 bond (twice the lien), which the Witters paid to the clerk.
- After a bench trial, the court found the Witters breached the contract (owing $4,300) but also found Mills Fence violated the CSPA and awarded the Witters $200 plus $3,120 in statutory attorneys’ fees.
- The trial court ordered distribution of the posted bond: $980 to Mills Fence and $7,620 to the Witters, and the clerk issued checks accordingly.
- Neither party sought a stay of the trial-court judgment or its execution after entry and distribution of funds.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the appeals are moot after the court-ordered disbursement of escrowed funds | Mills Fence argued (by cross-appeal) against aspects of the judgment but did not seek a stay | Witters appealed the judgment but did not seek a stay either | Appeals are moot because the judgment was voluntarily satisfied by disbursal and no stay was requested |
| Whether satisfaction by clerk distribution bars appellate review | Mills Fence implicitly contended review remained appropriate despite distribution | Witters contended error in trial court but offered no stay to preserve funds for relief | Satisfaction by payment/disbursement without fraud or a stay extinguishes the controversy and precludes appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- Blodgett v. Blodgett, 49 Ohio St.3d 243, 551 N.E.2d 1249 (Ohio 1990) (satisfaction of judgment renders an appeal moot)
- Rauch v. Noble, 169 Ohio St. 314, 159 N.E.2d 451 (Ohio 1959) (voluntary payment and satisfaction of judgment ends controversy and forecloses appellate review)