Sullivans, Inc. v. Haehn
2014 Ohio 399
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Sullivans, Inc. obtained a Massachusetts default judgment against Chicago Cycles, Haehn, and Russell Haehn for $84,534.24 and filed it in Ohio.
- Sullivans sought a creditor’s bill to compel payments under a promissory note and to accelerate and sue for amounts due from Yukon International, Inc. and Haehn.
- Sullivans asked the court to appoint a receiver to take possession of the promissory note, accelerate its terms, and file suit.
- The trial court denied the receiver appointment and, after cross-motions for summary judgment, granted Sullivans’ claim to a creditor’s bill but denied standing to Haehn for acceleration.
- Sullivans again sought a receiver; after an evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied the appointment, and the court of appeals affirmed.
- The appellate court held that receipt of appointment of a receiver is governed by a clear and convincing standard and affirmed denial as within the trial court’s discretion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court properly denied appointment of a receiver | Sullivans argues preponderance suffices for this simple post-judgment remedy | Haehn Yukon contend the standard is clear and convincing, not preponderance | Standard is clear and convincing; denial affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Lakeshore Motor Freight v. Glenway Industries, Inc., 2 Ohio App.3d 8, 440 N.E.2d 567 (1st Dist.1981) (creditor’s bill limits to debtor’s equitable interest; cannot usurp prosecution of the chose in action)
- Equity Centers Dev. Co. v. South Coast Centers, Inc., 83 Ohio App.3d 643, 615 N.E.2d 662 (8th Dist.1992) (receivership is extraordinary; require clear and convincing evidence)
- State ex rel. Celebrezze v. Gibbs, 60 Ohio St.3d 69, 573 N.E.2d 62 (1991) (appointment of a receiver within discretionary rulings subject to abuse of discretion review)
- Lombardi, Inc. v. Smithfield, 11 A.3d 1180 (Del. 1989) (irreparable harm is the most important factor for a preliminary injunction)
- 2115-2121 Ontario Bldg., L.L.C. v. Anter, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 98627, 2013-Ohio-2995 (2013) (clear and convincing standard for receiverships)