OHIO RECEIVABLES, LLC v. GODWIN DURUNNER, a/k/a CHUKWUKERE G. DURUNNA
Case No. 13 CAG 03 0017
COURT OF APPEALS DELAWARE COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
December 16, 2013
2013-Ohio-5514
Hon. Sheila G. Farmer, P. J., Hon. John W. Wise, J., Hon. Patricia A. Delaney, J.
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Civil Appeal from the Municipal Court, Case No. 11 CVF 00173; JUDGMENT: Affirmed
For Plaintiff-Appellee
JACKSON T. MOYER
NICHOLAS J. CHEEK
CHEEK LAW OFFICES
471 East Broad Street, 12th Floor
Columbus, Ohio 43215
For Defendant-Appellant
GODWIN DURUNNER
a/k/a CHUKWUKERE G. DURUNNA
8837 Juneberry Road
Lewis Center, Ohio 43035
Wise, J.
{¶1} Appellant Godwin Durunner, aka Chukwukere Durunna, apрeals the judgment of the Delaware County Municipal Court, which granted judgment in favor of Appellee Ohio Receivables LLC in an action to collect on а delinquent credit card account. The relevant facts leading to this appeal are as follows.
{¶2} In 2004, appellant opened a credit card аccount with Chase Bank USA, N.A. and was issued account number xxxx-xxxx-xxxx-7652. Due to subsequent failures by appellant to pay back certain credit obligations under the account terms, Chase wrote off the account on or about April 30, 2007. Appellant nonetheless made some payments on the account until October 21, 2008.
{¶3} On January 24, 2011, Appellee Ohio Receivables, having purchased the charged-off account, filed a collection action against appellant, seeking reрayment of the sum of $2,385.25, plus interest at the rate of 24.00% per annum. On February 14, 2011, appellant filed an answer to the complaint, denying most of the allegations therein for want of knowledge.
{¶4} Appellant also filed a motion to dismiss on February 14, 2011. Said motion was denied four days later.
{¶5} On March 14, 2011, appellant filed a second motion tо dismiss. Said motion was also denied.
{¶6} On April 11, 2011, appellant filed a motion to strike the attachments to appellee‘s complaint; contemporaneously, appellant filed an “opposition to court‘s denial of defendant‘s second motion to dismiss.” These motions were treated as an objection to thе magistrate‘s decisions, and were denied by the trial court.
{¶8} Appellant then filed a third motion to dismiss, which the court scheduled to be heard on the date of trial.
{¶9} On October 7, 2011, approximately five weeks bеfore the date of the trial, appellant filed a motion for summary judgment, which the court scheduled to be heard on the date of trial.
{¶10} A bench trial before the magistrate took place on November 16, 2011.
{¶11} On February 14, 2013, the magistrate issued a five-page decision recommending judgment in favor of appellee in the amount of $2,229.25 plus interest of 3% per annum from April 30, 2007. The magistrate, inter alia, specifically rejected any claim that the account was connected to a person other than appellant with a slightly different social security number. Neither party filed any objections to the decision of the magistrate. The trial cоurt approved and adopted the magistrate‘s decision on February 18, 2013.
{¶12} Appellant filed a notice of appeal on March 14, 2013. He herein raises thе following seven Assignments of Error:
{¶13} “I. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED ON FEBRUARY 18, 2013, BY ENTERING JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE (OHIO
{¶14} “II. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED BY ENTERING JUDGMENT ON FEBRUARY 18, 2013, BY DETERMINING THAT THE ASSIGNMENT OF ACCOUNT AND CHAIN OF ASSIGNMENT WAS PROPER AND THAT OHIO RECEIVABLES WAS THE REAL PARTY IN INTEREST IN THIS CASE.
{¶15} “III. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN THE FEBRUARY 18, 2013, (SIC) FOR ACCEPTING THE AFFIDAVITS SUPPLIED BY OHIO RECEIVABLES (PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE) IN SUPPORT OF THEIR CLAIM.
{¶16} “IV. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED BY ENTERING A JUDGMENT FEBRUARY 18, 2013 IN FAVOR OF OHIO RECEIVABLES THAT THE DISCREPANCY IN THE NAMES AND SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER WERE PROPER IN THE CASE.
{¶17} “V. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN ENTERING JUDGMENT FEBRUARY 18, 2013, IN FAVOR OF OHIO RECEIVABLES THAT NEGLECTING THE ALLEGED DEFENDANT‘S MOTION TO STRIKE DOCUMENTS WAS PROPER.
{¶18} “VI. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN ENTERING JUDGMENT FEBRUARY 18, 2013, IN FAVOR OF OHIO RECEIVABLES THAT NEGLECTING THE ALLEGED DEFENDANT‘S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT WAS PROPER.
{¶19} “VII. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN ENTERING JUDGMENT FEBRUARY 18, 2013, IN FAVOR OF OHIO RECEIVABLES THAT NEGLECTING TO MAKE DECISION ON THIS CASE WAY PAST THE STATUTE OF LIMITATION (SIC) WAS PROPER.”
{¶20} In his First Assignment of Error, appellant appears to argue that the trial court should have dismissed appellee‘s complaint for thе alleged failure to attach a copy of the proper account assignment document to the complaint. We disagree.
{¶21}
{¶22} This Court has recognized that a defendant who fails to file a mоtion for a more definite statement under
{¶23} Upon review, we find Loken and Carson to be on point in the case sub judice, and appellant‘s First Assignment of Error is therefore overruled.
II., III., IV., V.
{¶24} In his Second, Third, Fourth, and Fifth Assignments of Error, appellant raises various evidentiary challenges to the trial court‘s judgment in favor of appellee.
{¶25} We first note appellant herein did not object to the magistrate‘s decision.
{¶26} However, even under a plain error standard, our review is effectively impeded because appellant has failed to provide this Court with a written transcript of the trial to the magistrate. Pursuant to
{¶27} Appellant‘s Second, Third, Fourth, and Fifth Assignments of Error are overruled.
{¶28} In his Sixth Assignment of Error, appellant maintains the trial court erred in granting judgment in favor of appellee despite a pending motion for summary judgment previously filed by appellant. We disagree.
{¶29} Generally, “when a trial court fails to rule upon a pretrial motion, it may be presumed that the сourt overruled it.” State ex rel. Cassels v. Dayton City School Dist. Bd. of Edn., 69 Ohio St.3d 217, 223, 631 N.E.2d 150, 1994-Ohio-92. Furthermore, any error by a trial court in denying a motion for summary judgment is rendered moot or harmless if a subsequеnt trial on the same issues raised in the motion demonstrates that there were genuine issues of material fact supporting a judgment in favor of the party against whom the motion was made. Harraman v. Howlett, 5th Dist. Morrow No. 03CA0023, 2004-Ohio-5566, ¶ 23, citing Continental Ins. Co. v. Whittington (1994), 71 Ohio St.3d 150, 156, 642 N.E.2d 615. See, also, True Light Christian Ministries Church v. Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc., 157 Ohio App.3d 198, 2004-Ohio-2539, ¶ 23.
{¶30} In the case sub judice, the magistrate issued a pretrial order on October 12, 2011 stating that “[a]ll motions properly before the court on the day of trial will be considered by the court at that time.” See Trial Court Docket No. 52. However, because the trial transcript in this matter has not been provided, we are compelled to apply the presumption of regularity to the magistrate‘s subsequent decision, thereafter аpproved by the trial court, to hear the case on the merits on the day of trial.
{¶31} Appellant‘s Sixth Assignment of Error is therefore overruled.
VII.
{¶33} It has long been recognized that “[t]he purpose of statutes of limitations is to prevent delay in asserting сlaims and to prevent the asserting of stale claims.” Stauffer v. Isaly Dairy Co. (1965), 4 Ohio App.2d 15, 28, 211 N.E.2d 72. We note
{¶34} Appellant‘s Seventh Assignment of Error is overruled.
{¶35} For the reasons stated in the foregoing opinion, the judgment of the Municipal Court оf Delaware County, Ohio, is hereby affirmed.
By: Wise, J.
Farmer, P. J., and
Delaney, J., concur.
HON. JOHN W. WISE
HON. SHEILA G. FARMER
HON. PATRICIA A. DELANEY
JWW/d 1119
OHIO RECEIVABLES, LLC Plaintiff-Appellee -vs- GODWIN DURUNNER, a/k/a CHUKWUKERE G. DURUNNA Defendant-Appellant
Case No. 13 CAG 03 0017
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR DELAWARE COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
JUDGMENT ENTRY
For the reasons stated in our accompanying Memorandum-Opinion, the judgment of the Municipal Court of Delaware County, Ohio, is affirmed.
Costs assessed to appellant.
HON. JOHN W. WISE
HON. SHEILA G. FARMER
HON. PATRICIA A. DELANEY