Wiseman v. Wiseman, 2014 Ohio 2002

Wiseman appeals a contempt finding in Medina County Domestic Relations, arising from a separation agreement tied to the marital home at 5571 Chippewa Road, with exclusive possession by Husband and shared title but Wife vacated the home in 2008.
Husband remained in exclusive possession and paid home expenses through 2010, then executed a quitclaim deed to Wife without her knowledge.
The agreement required Husband to pay mortgage, taxes, insurance, and maintenance while in possession, and allowed sale of the home by Husband.
Wife later began paying home expenses after discovering the quitclaim, and she challenged Husband’s compliance as contemptuous.
The trial court and this court concluded the agreement was not ambiguous and upheld a contempt finding against Husband, with a purge mechanism and later confirmations on appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the separation agreement’s real property provision is ambiguous.	Wiseman contends ambiguity in §4 defeats clear enforcement.	Wife argues the agreement is unambiguous and enforceable as written.	Not ambiguous; terms clear and enforced.
Whether Wife’s cooperation in the sale of the home was lacking.	Wiseman asserts Wife failed to cooperate to sell as required.	Wife cooperated by meeting with the realtor and agreeing to price adjustments; no offers existed.	Not against the weight; Wife cooperated.
Whether the trial court properly found Husband in contempt.	Wiseman argues errors in interpretation and cooperation negate contempt.	Wife’s cooperation and Husband’s continued payment supported contempt finding.	Contempt finding supported.
Whether the court erred by not ordering restoration of title to Husband as a plain error.	Wiseman claims omission of title restoration is plain error.	No provision in the agreement requires restoration of title as a condition of relief; no plain error.	No plain error; no reversal.

State ex rel. Petro v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 104 Ohio St.3d 559 (Ohio 2004) (interpret contracts; plain meaning governs if unambiguous)
Seasons Coal Co., Inc. v. Cleveland, 10 Ohio St.3d 77 (Ohio 1984) (manifest weight/credibility standard in civil appeals)
Alexander v. Buckeye Pipe Line Co., 53 Ohio St.2d 241 (Ohio 1970) (interpret contracts; ordinary meaning of terms)
Goldfuss v. Davidson, 79 Ohio St.3d 116 (Ohio 1997) (plain error doctrine in civil appeals)
LeFort v. Century 21- Maitland Realty Co., 32 Ohio St.3d 121 (Ohio 1987) (plain error/appellate standards guidance)