Strahler v. Vessels
2012 Ohio 4170
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Strahler sued the Amrines, Vessels, and Dehmlow to establish ownership of 307, 307½, and 309 Second Street Marietta under an oral contract.
- Strahler claimed she made substantial payments and improvements under the land contract, and that later sales by the Amrines affected her rights.
- Vessels purchased the 307 and 307½ properties from the Amrines; the trial court held Vessels was a bona fide purchaser for value and quieted title in him, while Strahler’s claims against Vessels/Dehmlow were dismissed.
- The trial court awarded Strahler damages to the extent of $37,798.96 under a theory of unjust enrichment/quasi-contract for improvements, taxes, insurance, and down payment she made.
- Amrines argued Strahler did not plead unjust enrichment and that the claim was not legally pleaded or supported by the complaint.
- On appeal, the court reversed the unjust enrichment damages for lack of fair notice and remanded for proceedings consistent with that ruling.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the complaint provide fair notice of unjust enrichment? | Strahler contends the facts show she conferred benefits and seeks relief; pleadings suffice. | Amrines contend the complaint did not plead unjust enrichment as a theory of recovery. | No fair notice; unjust enrichment not pled. |
| May damages for unjust enrichment be awarded where not expressly prayed for? | Strahler seeks monetary relief for improper interference and related benefits. | Damages must be pleaded as a separate claim. | Damages for unjust enrichment were not properly requested. |
| Should the damages award be sustained given pleading defects and theory? | Strahler maintained the evidence supports unjust enrichment. | Without proper pleading, damages cannot stand. | Damages reversed and the matter remanded. |
Key Cases Cited
- Border City S. & L. Assn. v. Moan, 15 Ohio St.3d 65 (1984) (pleading need not set out every element if facts show entitlement)
- Illinois Controls, Inc. v. Langham, 70 Ohio St.3d 512 (1994) (unjust enrichment not subject to heightened pleading; Civ.R. 8 basics)
- HLC Trucking v. Harris, 2003-Ohio-694 (7th Dist) (unjust enrichment recognized as quasi-contractual)
- Dailey v. Craigmyle & Son Farms, L.L.C., 177 Ohio App.3d 439 (2008-Ohio-4034) (quantum meruit measure under quasi-contract)
- Hummel v. Hummel, 133 Ohio St.520 (1938) (elements of unjust enrichment include benefit, knowledge, and unjust retention)
- Fancher v. Fancher, 8 Ohio App.3d 79 (1982) (pleading standard for claims without crystalline specificity)