JOHN ALLEN v. LISA BRYAN, fka, LISA ALLEN
Case No. 12CA15
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT HOCKING COUNTY
RELEASED 05/06/13
[Cite as Allen v. Bryan, 2013-Ohio-1917.]
Harsha, J.
APPEARANCES:
John Allen, Nelsonville, Ohio, pro se.
Harsha, J.
{¶1} John Allen appeals the trial court‘s judgment dismissing his complaint for failing to state a cause of action. Allen contends that the trial court erred by dismissing his complaint alleging breach of marital contract because such a cause of action exists in Ohio. We disagree and because he cites no legal authority to support his claim, we find that dismissal of his complaint was appropriate.
{¶2} He also claims that the trial court erred by dismissing his complaint before he could to complete discovery. Nevertheless, because the trial court only looks at the face of the complaint to decide a
{¶3} Finally Allen argues that the trial court should have given him notice of its intent to dismiss his complaint and also given him an opportunity to amend it. However,
I. FACTS
{¶4} John Allen and Lisa Bryan were married on July 7, 2007, and subsequently granted a divorce in February 2012. Thereafter, Allen filed a complaint for breach of contract based on the parties’ marital vows and requested actual and punitive damages. Bryan filed an answer to Allen‘s complaint, in which she asserted various defenses, including failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. At the same time, Bryan also filed a “Motion to Dismiss/Motion for Judgment Upon the Pleadings” pursuant to
II. ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR
{¶5} Allen raises two assignments of error for our review:
- “Denial of Due Process.”
- “Abuse of Discretion.”
III. LAW AND ANALYSIS
A. Standard of Review
{¶7} A trial court‘s decision to dismiss a plaintiff‘s complaint pursuant to
{¶8} To support his first assignment of error, Allen cites Caldwell v. Spillman, 7 West.L.J. 149, 1 Dec. Re. 308 (1849), and Cook v. Mozer, 108 Ohio St. 30, 140 N.E. 590 (1923), contending that “it has been long held in Ohio that there is a cause of action for Breach of Marital Contract.” (Emphasis sic.) However, neither case stands for the proposition of law that he proposes. In Caldwell, the plaintiff brought suit based on breach of promise to marry. This cause of action is distinct from breach of marital contract, and has since been abolished by
{¶9} “While there are certain contractual aspects to marriage – i.e., certain ante-nuptial and separation agreements may be enforceable on contract grounds – the marriage relation itself is a contract only metaphorically. It is more properly understood as consensual status sanctioned by law * * *. To apply the rules of ordinary commercial contracts to the marriage contract runs against sound public policy.” Wischmeier v. Wischmeier, 8th Dist. Nos. 44915, 44963, 1983 WL 5773, *5. Rather, “[t]he proper remedy for breach of the marriage contract is divorce, not damages.” Id. Accordingly, we disagree with Allen that Ohio recognizes a cause of action for breach of marital contract.
{¶10} Here, Allen stated in his complaint that he and Bryan entered into a contract on July 7, 2007, and “obligated themselves to ‘love, honor and support one another for better or for worse, for richer or for poorer, in sickness and in health, as long as we both shall live.‘” He alleged that Bryan breached the contract by both “physically attack[ing]” and “verbally abus[ing]” him. Thus, it is clear from the face of his complaint that he is alleging a breach of marital contract. Even taking the facts alleged in his complaint as true and making all reasonable inferences in his favor, it is clear he can prove no set of facts which would entitle him to relief. Accordingly, the trial court did not err by dismissing his complaint.
{¶11} Allen also asserts that he was denied due process because the trial court dismissed his complaint before he was able to complete discovery. He claims if he had “been allowed to complete discovery requests, in all probability, [he] would have been
{¶12} However, when deciding a
B. Notice and Opportunity to Amend the Complaint
{¶13} Allen argues in his second assignment of error that the trial court erred by dismissing his complaint without giving him notice or explaining why his complaint was deficient. However, Bryan‘s answer and motion to dismiss gave Allen notice that his complaint may be dismissed. And “[i]t is well settled that the trial court has no obligation to issue a written opinion when granting a
{¶14} Allen also claims that the trial court erred by dismissing his complaint without giving him an opportunity to amend it. However,
JUDGMENT AFFIRMED.
It is ordered that the JUDGMENT IS AFFIRMED and that Appellant shall pay the costs.
The Court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal.
It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this Court directing the Hocking County Common Pleas Court to carry this judgment into execution.
Any stay previously granted by this Court is hereby terminated as of the date of this entry.
A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to
McFarland, P.J. & Hoover, J.: Concur in Judgment and Opinion.
For the Court
BY:
William H. Harsha, Judge
NOTICE TO COUNSEL
Pursuant to Local Rule No. 14, this document constitutes a final judgment entry and the time period for further appeal commences from the date of filing with the clerk.