Trumbull Twp. Bd. of Trustees v. Rickard
2017 Ohio 8143
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- The Board of Trumbull Township Trustees and Ohio Attorney General sued Lawrence Rickard and Phoenix Productions over alleged misappropriation of charitable proceeds from beer sales at the Great Lakes Medieval Faire (1994–2008). The Attorney General sued on behalf of multiple charities; the Board asserted a contract claim tied to proceeds for the Trumbull Township Volunteer Fire Department (TTVFD).
- Litigation included extensive discovery disputes; the trial court found egregious discovery abuse by Rickard, struck defendants’ pleadings, and entered default judgment on liability, reserving damages for later hearing.
- At the damages hearing parties submitted expert reports, ODLC (Ohio Division of Liquor Control) response documents (unsigned), the 2009 receiver’s accounting, and testimony about whether a written perpetual contract ever existed or only year‑to‑year oral arrangements.
- The trial court (1) declined to treat every complaint averment as conclusively admitted for damages because terms of the alleged perpetual contract were neither proved nor located, (2) awarded the Attorney General $118,900 plus interest (after releasing $19,500) for underpaid charitable proceeds (2004–2008), and (3) awarded nothing to the Board on its breach/accounting claims and denied attorney fees, punitive fines, constructive trust, and most other remedies.
- Appellants appealed, raising issues about application of Civ.R. 8(D)/55(A), due process (conversion of damages hearing), evidentiary rulings (use/weight of ODLC responses), and refusal to impose a constructive trust or award fees.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Civ.R. 8(D) required the court to treat all averments as admitted for damages after striking answers | Board/AG: striking answers admitted all averments, so damages must be measured by those admissions | Trial court/Defs: Civ.R.55(A) permits inquiry into damages and proof of contract terms despite sanctions | Court: Civ.R.55(A) applies; trial court did not abuse discretion in requiring proof of contract terms and refusing to treat disputed perpetual contract as conclusively established |
| Whether damages hearing was converted to a merits trial without due process notice | Board/AG: court effectively held a merits trial without notice and after in limine rulings | Trial court: parties had notice and opportunity; hearing properly limited to proving damages and contract terms needed to quantify them | Held: no due process violation; parties had notice and opportunity and court did not convert the hearing improperly |
| Admissibility and weight of ODLC responses and other posthearing evidence | Board/AG: defendants’ references and ODLC documents were improper or unreliable and should be struck or given little weight | Defs: ODLC materials and testimony were admissible and corroborative of receiver’s accounting | Held: trial court acted within discretion; ODLC responses were admissible, used to corroborate 2009 receiver report, but trial court assigned weight when appropriate |
| Whether constructive trust, punitive fines, or attorney fees were required | Board/AG: unjust enrichment and traceability of proceeds to Rickard’s assets justify constructive trust and other sanctions | Defs: no proof of fraud/malicious conduct; remedies unwarranted given records and state acceptance of submissions | Held: trial court did not err; no clear and convincing evidence of fraud or unjust enrichment to justify constructive trust, punitive fines, or attorneys’ fees; judgment affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Reese v. Proppe, 3 Ohio App.3d 103 (8th Dist.) (distinguishing default-judgment contexts)
- Ohio Furniture Co. v. Mindala, 22 Ohio St.3d 99 (1986) (notice requirement applies to dismissals with prejudice for discovery violations)
- Nakoff v. Fairview Gen. Hosp., 75 Ohio St.3d 254 (1996) (trial court has broad discretion to impose discovery sanctions)
- Seasons Coal Co. v. Cleveland, 10 Ohio St.3d 77 (1984) (trial judge as factfinder determines credibility and weight of evidence)
- Perotti v. Ferguson, 7 Ohio St.3d 1 (1983) (preference to decide disputes on the merits)