Skyward Learning Servs., Inc. v. Gray, 153 N.E.3d 135

Skyward Learning Services (a private special-needs school) enrolled Joshua Gray for 2017–18 and 2018–19; Skyward relied on Jon Peterson Scholarship funds to pay tuition.
Skyward's enrollment contract required a signed agreement, a nonrefundable $300 registration/materials fee, and set cancellation penalties depending on timing (including a $1,000 pre-school-year cancelation after June 1, 20% tuition if withdrawn between start of school and Sept. 30, and invoicing for a full fiscal quarter for withdrawals after Sept. 30).
On October 30, 2018, Angela Gray emailed superintendent/founder Melissa Amrein that she was withdrawing Joshua after Amrein had twice told Gray she should withdraw him or “go somewhere else” if unhappy.
Skyward sued Gray in small claims for $3,626 in unpaid fees not reimbursed by the scholarship after Joshua’s withdrawal and enrollment elsewhere; the trial court entered judgment for Skyward.
On appeal, the Twelfth District accepted Gray’s statement of facts (appellee brief was stricken) and reviewed the judgment for manifest weight of the evidence.
The appellate court reversed, concluding Gray reasonably relied on Amrein’s advice and equitable estoppel barred Skyward’s recovery.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Gray is contractually liable for unpaid tuition/fees after withdrawing in Oct.	Skyward: Contract terms make parent responsible for unpaid/ unreimbursed fees; judgment for $3,626 proper.	Gray: She withdrew only after superintendent told her to take him out; she reasonably relied on that advice; equitable estoppel bars recovery.	Reversed — court applied equitable estoppel: Gray’s reasonable reliance on Amrein’s statements precluded Skyward from enforcing the fees.
Whether equitable estoppel was waived because Gray did not formally plead it	Skyward: (implicit) defense not pleaded by name, so should not apply.	Gray: Although not labeled, she presented the factual basis at trial and in filings; small claims proceedings are informal and pro se.	Court allowed the defense on the record-level facts, finding the equitable-estoppel elements sufficiently raised in small-claims context.

Eastley v. Volkman, 132 Ohio St.3d 328 (2012) (standard for manifest-weight review in civil cases)
State ex rel. Chavis v. Sycamore City School Dist. Bd. of Edn., 71 Ohio St.3d 26 (1994) (definition/principles of equitable estoppel)
Heskett v. Paulig, 131 Ohio App.3d 221 (1999) (elements required to establish equitable estoppel)
Livingston v. Diocese of Cleveland, 126 Ohio App.3d 299 (1998) (equitable estoppel may bar enforcement of otherwise valid rights)
Jefferson Place Condominium Assn. v. Naples, 125 Ohio App.3d 394 (1998) (equitable estoppel promotes justice by preventing unfair advantage)
Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Pearlman, 106 Ohio St.3d 136 (2005) (small-claims proceedings are informal and permit pro se parties latitude)