Ohio Dept. of Taxation v. Tolliver
2016 Ohio 7223
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2016Background
- The Ohio Department of Taxation (DOT) obtained money judgments against appellees (Tolliver and Amos) for unpaid sales and income taxes and recorded judgment liens under R.C. 5739.13(C) and 5747.13.
- DOT served post-judgment discovery requests under Civ.R. 26, 34, and 69 to obtain information to execute on the judgments; appellees failed to respond.
- DOT moved to compel discovery; the trial court denied the motions, holding DOT was required to use the debtor-examination procedure under R.C. 2333.09 instead of Civ.R. 69 discovery.
- DOT appealed the denial; the appellate court treated the question as purely legal and reviewed de novo.
- The central dispute: whether a judgment creditor (DOT) may employ Civ.R. 69 discovery to aid execution, or is limited to seeking a debtor examination under R.C. 2333.09.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a judgment creditor may use Civ.R. 69 discovery to aid execution | DOT: Civ.R. 69 expressly permits a judgment creditor to "obtain discovery" in aid of execution using the civil rules | Appellees: Post-judgment discovery must proceed under R.C. 2333.09 (debtor examination) rather than Civ.R. 69 | Court: Reversed — judgment creditor may use Civ.R. 69 discovery; R.C. 2333.09 is permissive and not exclusive |
Key Cases Cited
- Castlebrook, Ltd. v. Dayton Properties Ltd. Partnership, 78 Ohio App.3d 340 (1992) (discussing appellate review where trial court s discovery ruling is based on incorrect legal assumption)