Ramsey v. Pellicioni
2016 Ohio 558
Ohio Ct. App.2016Background
- Angela Ramsey sought civil stalking protection orders (CSPOs) against neighbors Rebecca and Gary Pelliccioni after years of the Pelliccionis photographing the Ramseys’ property and, at times, their children.
- The photography spanned roughly 2007–2014 and was introduced as evidence (several hundred photos) during a 2014 contempt hearing related to a prior zoning dispute.
- The Ramseys repeatedly contacted police about the photographing; sheriff reports documented calls and statements that the conduct caused stress and led to some changes (e.g., installation of a privacy fence).
- A magistrate granted CSPOs against both Pelliccionis; the trial court adopted the magistrate’s decision.
- On appeal, the Seventh District reviewed whether the evidence met the statutory definition of "mental distress" required for menacing by stalking and vacated the CSPOs for lack of sufficient evidence of mental distress.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Ramsey) | Defendant's Argument (Pelliccioni) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether evidence proved a pattern causing mental distress under R.C. 2903.211 | Repeated photographing over years caused stress, fear for children, and changed behavior (calls to police, privacy fence) | Conduct was only upsetting/annoying; no threats or evidence of mental illness or incapacity; insufficient proof of "mental distress" | Reversed — insufficient evidence that conduct caused the statutory-level mental distress required for menacing by stalking |
| Whether CSPO against Rebecca Pelliccioni was supported by competent, credible evidence | Ramsey pointed to reports and testimony linking Rebecca to the photographing and resulting distress | Pelliccioni argued Ramsey’s testimony as to Rebecca was vague and limited | Moot after disposition on mental distress ground (no CSPOs sustained) |
Key Cases Cited
- Eastley v. Volkman, 132 Ohio St.3d 328 (Ohio 2012) (standard for manifest-weight review in civil cases)
- State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (Ohio 1997) (discussion of sufficiency vs. manifest-weight standards)
- Smith v. Wunsch, 162 Ohio App.3d 21 (Ohio Ct. App. 2005) (changed routine can corroborate mental distress)