2019 Ohio 1435
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background
- Westlake and Cleveland had a long‑standing 1990 water service agreement; dispute arose over termination notice requirements and Cleveland’s attempt to recover "stranded costs."
- Trial court initially ruled (on summary judgment) that stranded costs were not recoverable and the contract terminated after its 25‑year term; this Court in Westlake I reversed in part, holding the agreement was nonexclusive with annual renewals and remanded to determine what constituted reasonable notice to terminate.
- On remand the trial court set an evidentiary hearing; one witness (OEPA official Susan Schell) testified on March 27, 2018 and the hearing was continued to April 27, 2018.
- On April 23, 2018, Westlake filed a Civ.R. 41(A)(1)(a) notice of voluntary dismissal without prejudice after the hearing had already started; Cleveland moved to strike the notice as improper.
- The trial court held the notice was self‑executing and therefore divested it of jurisdiction to rule on Cleveland’s motion to strike; Cleveland sought and obtained a writ of mandamus from this Court (Westlake II), which held the notice was ineffective because trial had commenced and directed the trial court to proceed.
- This appeal challenges the trial court’s ruling that it lacked jurisdiction to rule on Cleveland’s motion to strike; the appellate court reverses, relying on the prior mandamus decision and law on voluntary dismissals.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a Civ.R. 41(A)(1)(a) notice filed after the commencement of trial is effective to terminate the action | Westlake: notice effective; dismissal is self‑executing and divests court of jurisdiction | Cleveland: notice filed after trial commenced (witness testimony taken) so rule 41(A)(1)(a) does not apply and the notice is a nullity | Court: dismissal invalid because trial had commenced; plaintiff cannot unilaterally dismiss under Civ.R.41(A)(1)(a) after trial begins |
| Whether the trial court retained jurisdiction to rule on Cleveland’s motion to strike and to conduct the remand hearing | Westlake: court lost jurisdiction upon filing of the notice | Cleveland: court retained jurisdiction because the voluntary notice was ineffective and court must rule on motion to strike and proceed with remand hearing | Court: trial court erred in finding it lacked jurisdiction; mandamus decision (Westlake II) and law of the case require the trial court to rule on the motion and proceed with the hearing |
Key Cases Cited
- Schwering v. TRW Vehicle Safety Sys., 132 Ohio St.3d 129, 2012-Ohio-1481, 970 N.E.2d 865 (establishes that a plaintiff may not unilaterally dismiss under Civ.R.41(A)(1)(a) after trial begins)
- State ex rel. Conkle v. Sadler, 99 Ohio St.3d 402, 2003-Ohio-4124, 792 N.E.2d 1116 (a court with general jurisdiction may determine its own jurisdiction absent a clear, patent lack of jurisdiction)
- Nolan v. Nolan, 11 Ohio St.3d 1, 462 N.E.2d 410 (law of the case doctrine: appellate decisions control subsequent proceedings in the same case)
- State ex rel. Heck v. Kessler, 72 Ohio St.3d 98, 647 N.E.2d 792 (mandate on remand must be given full effect; mandamus may enforce compliance with appellate mandates)