Tibbitts v. Tibbitts, 2011 Ohio 5280

Lori appeals a judgment in a post-decree divorce case ordering her to pay David $750 in attorney fees while David must pay Lori $1,000, among other items.
Both parties filed contempt motions; the trial court adopted a magistrate’s decision and overruled Lori’s objections.
The appeal rests on whether the court should have set off the two monetary obligations rather than issuing separate payments.
The appellate court notes Lori did not file the hearing transcript, requiring a presumption of regularity unless shown otherwise.
The court explains that there is no legal right to a set-off but that set-off is within a trial court’s discretion when judgments involve the same parties.
The court ultimately overrules Lori’s assignments of error and affirms the judgment, awarding costs to the appellee.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the court should have set off the obligations.	Tibbitts argued for set-off against Lori’s obligation.	Tibbitts argued no set-off right exists; court discretion governs.	Discretionary set-off not required; overruled.
Whether the court properly treated competing and offsetting obligations.	Lori claimed controlling law favored offsetting the debts.	David contended proper discretion and absence of abuse of discretion.	Assignments of error overruled; judgment affirmed.

Krause v. Krause, 35 Ohio App.3d 18 (1987) (set-off decision within court’s discretion)
State v. Brown, 38 Ohio St.3d 305 (1988) (presumption of regularity without transcript on appeal)