State Ex Rel. Skyway Investment Corp. v. Ashtabula County Court of Common Pleas
130 Ohio St. 3d 220
| Ohio | 2011Background
- 1992 common pleas judgment in Poss v. Morris for $149,750 and interest; collection difficulties led to forcible-entry-and-detainer action and a 1993 settlement
- Settlement provided Morris would convey property to Poss; Poss would have lien releases upon deed delivery; settlement incorporated into the 1993 judgment
- 1995 Morris bankruptcy; Sixth Circuit held a constructive trust in Poss’s favor and the property was not affected by the bankruptcy
- 2002 Poss moved in common pleas court for Morris to transfer the property; 2003 Morris transferred the property to Skyway before ruling
- 2005 Poss moved to appoint a receiver and a Civ.R. 70 conveyance expert to transfer property to Poss; 2006 court granted receiver appointment and conveyance steps
- 2007 Skyway appeared, moved to vacate, and later challenged jurisdiction; 2011 Court of Appeals denied Skyway’s petition for writs of prohibition and mandamus
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the common pleas court patently and unambiguously lacked jurisdiction | Skyway asserts lack of jurisdiction | Skyway joined and later challenged orders; court had jurisdiction | No patently unambiguous lack of jurisdiction |
| Whether Civ.R. 69/70 authorized enforcement and conveyance of property despite the money judgment | Civil procedures permitted enforcement against the property via conveyance | Enforcement could proceed under Civ.R. 69/70 post-judgment to effect conveyance | Court had jurisdiction to direct conveyance to Poss |
| Whether Skyway’s dormant-judgment claim was cognizable in prohibition and whether an adequate remedy existed by appeal | Dormancy claims are not proper in prohibition; remedy by appeal | Dormancy could be raised; extraordinary relief justified | Dormancy claim not cognizable; remedy by appeal available |
| Whether Skyway’s assertion of lack of personal jurisdiction was waived by appearance | Waiver through appearance and delay in objecting to jurisdiction | Appearance waived challenge; substantial evidence supported jurisdiction | Personal jurisdiction was established; waiver occurred |
Key Cases Cited
- Dzina v. Celebrezze, 108 Ohio St.3d 385 (2006-Ohio-1195) (adequate remedies by appeal when no patent lack of jurisdiction)
- State ex rel. Plant v. Cosgrove, 119 Ohio St.3d 264 (2008-Ohio-3838) (adequate remedy by appeal; jurisdictional challenges not extraordinary relief)
- State ex rel. Mosier v. Fornof, 126 Ohio St.3d 47 (2010-Ohio-2516) (absence of lack of jurisdiction; adequate remedy by appeal)
- Cramer v. Petrie, 70 Ohio St.3d 131 (1994-Ohio-) (courts have inherent authority to enforce their orders)
- State ex rel. Celebrezze v. Gibbs, 60 Ohio St.3d 69 (1991-Ohio-) (trial courts’ discretion to appoint a receiver)
- Maryhew v. Yova, 11 Ohio St.3d 154 (1984-Ohio-) (waiver by failure to challenge jurisdiction at first appearance)
- Merchants Bank & Trust Co. v. Five Star Fin. Corp., 2011-Ohio-2476 (2011-Ohio-2476) (contextual note on jurisdiction and remedies (appellate posture))