Olenchick v. Scramling, 2020 Ohio 4110

Brothers Rodney and Randy Olenchick had a long-standing, informal arrangement: Rodney used Garage Units Nos. 59 and 60 at Bayridge Condominiums; legal title history was confused and poorly documented.
In 2016 Randy sold his Bayridge condominium to John Scramling; the recorded warranty deed initially recited Garage Unit No. 41 but was later altered (handwritten) to show Garage Unit No. 59 and re-recorded.
Rodney refused to vacate Garage No. 59 after Scramling asserted ownership; the Olenchicks sued Scramling, the Lake County Recorder, Ohio Real Title Agency (Real Title), and the condominium association seeking reformation/cancellation of the altered deed and fees.
The trial court reformed the deed to reflect that no garage unit transferred to Scramling, granted summary judgment for the Recorder and Real Title (dismissing them), granted summary judgment for the Olenchicks on most of Scramling’s counterclaims, and left a narrow unjust-enrichment claim which was later dismissed by agreement.
The Olenchicks’ R.C. 2323.51 motion for attorney’s fees (alleging frivolous conduct and conspiracy to alter the deed) was denied.
On appeal the Eleventh District affirmed the Recorder’s and Real Title’s summary judgments and the denial of attorney’s fees.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the County Recorder is liable for recording an altered (fraudulent) deed	Recorder accepted and recorded a deed covertly altered after signing; Recorder had duty to refuse fraudulent instruments	Recorder must record instruments presented; R.C. 317.13 does not require inspection/investigation and Recorder did not alter the deed	Court: Recorder had no duty breached; no evidence Recorder altered document; summary judgment for Recorder affirmed
Whether Ohio Real Title Agency is liable (standing/damages) for failing to assure clear title by rerecording altered deed	Real Title’s conduct caused title defect; Rodney has standing despite lack of written transfer from Randy	Real Title argued merger by deed, Rodney lacks documentary title, and no evidence of monetary damages from alleged failure to assure clear title	Court: Even assuming Real Title erred, Olenchicks presented no evidence of damages and deed was reformed; summary judgment for Real Title affirmed
Whether defendants’ conduct was frivolous to justify attorney’s fees under R.C. 2323.51	Defendants and counsel acted maliciously and conspired to cover up falsified deed; Olenchicks incurred substantial fees and harm	Defendants’ positions and deposition conduct were not objectively frivolous; arguments had reasonable legal basis	Court: No egregious or objectively frivolous conduct shown; trial court did not abuse discretion in denying fees

Brown v. Cty. Commrs. of Scioto Cty., 87 Ohio App.3d 704 (4th Dist. 1993) (standard of de novo appellate review of summary judgment)
Grafton v. Ohio Edison Co., 77 Ohio St.3d 102 (1996) (summary judgment standard and review)
Temple v. Wean United, Inc., 50 Ohio St.2d 317 (1977) (requirements for Civ.R. 56(C) summary judgment)
Murphy v. Reynoldsburg, 65 Ohio St.3d 356 (1992) (doubts resolved in favor of nonmoving party)
Dresher v. Burt, 75 Ohio St.3d 280 (1996) (moving party’s initial burden in summary judgment)
Blain's Folding Serv., Inc. v. Cincinnati Ins. Co., 109 N.E.3d 177 (Ohio Ct. App.) (possession and evidentiary context can bear on ownership disputes)
State ex rel. DiFranco v. S. Euclid, 144 Ohio St.3d 571 (2015) (appellate standard for reviewing R.C. 2323.51 sanctions decisions—abuse of discretion)
State ex rel. Bell v. Madison Cty. Bd. of Commrs., 139 Ohio St.3d 106 (2014) (sanctions review and standards)
State ex rel. Striker v. Cline, 130 Ohio St.3d 214 (2011) (review standard for sanctions and related procedural law)
In re Spagnola, 195 Ohio App.3d 719 (2011) (appellate guidance on R.C. 2323.51 and abuse-of-discretion review)