Whitehair v. Stiers, 2016 Ohio 348

In August 2013 Josh and Jenny Stiers granted Jack and Joan Whitehair a recorded 25-foot right-of-way for ingress/egress to a 40-acre parcel as part of a settlement; the agreement required the responsible party to "repair and place the Right of Way in to as good condition as it was prior to the damage or need for maintenance."
By the time of the 2013 grant, the path beyond the Stiers' driveway was eroded, overgrown, wet and rutted; there was no visible gravel base.
On Sept. 15, 2013 Whitehair met a contractor to discuss adding shale/gravel to make the path passable; Josh Stiers objected and an argument occurred.
On Oct. 12, 2013 Whitehair notified the Stiers that invitees (hunters) would use the right-of-way; Stiers refused access.
Whitehair sued for breach of the peace, material interference with the right-of-way, and sought injunctive and declaratory relief; bench trial was held June 1, 2015.
Trial court concluded adding a shale/gravel base would be an improvement (not a permitted "repair"), denied most damages (awarded $1), but issued a permanent injunction enforcing the right-of-way and requiring written 7-day notice for hunters.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether adding shale/gravel to the ROW was a permissible "repair/maintenance" or an impermissible improvement	Whitehair: graveling was a repair to restore prior usable condition	Stiers: graveling would be an improvement beyond restoring the ROW to its recorded condition	Court: adding shale/gravel was an improvement, not a repair, because no gravel existed at recording; agreement must be strictly construed
Whether Stiers' conduct on Sept. 15, 2013 amounted to breach of the peace or material interference with ROW use	Whitehair: Stiers' objection to graveling and the argument interfered with his ROW rights	Stiers: he prevented an impermissible improvement but did not deny access to the property	Court: no breach of the peace or material interference occurred on Sept. 15, 2013 (linked to repair/improvement finding)

Eastley v. Volkman, 132 Ohio St.3d 328 (2012) (standard for reviewing manifest-weight challenges and civil sufficiency/weight discussion)
State v. Thompkins, 78 Ohio St.3d 380 (1997) (discussing appellate review standards)
State v. Martin, 20 Ohio App.3d 172 (1st Dist.) (standard for manifest-weight review)
State v. Jamison, 49 Ohio St.3d 182 (1990) (credibility and weight of evidence are for the trier of fact)
Davis v. Flickinger, 77 Ohio St.3d 415 (1997) (trier of fact best positioned to judge witness demeanor and credibility)