Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Campana v. Slomovitz

December 4, 2008

WILLIAM CAMPANA PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT
v.
HARVEY SLOMOVITZ, AKA, H. ALLEN CONSTR., CO., INC. DEFENDANT-APPELLEE



Civil Appeal from the Bedford Municipal Court Case No. 06 CVF 04708 JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Patricia Ann Blackmon, J.

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION

BEFORE: Blackmon, J., Kilbane, P.J., and Stewart, J.

{¶1} Appellant William Campana ("Campana"), pro se, appeals the trial court's adjudication of an oral contract dispute. Campana assigns thirteen errors for our review.*fn1

{¶2} Having reviewed the record and pertinent law, we affirm the trial court's decision. The apposite facts follow.

{¶3} On September 18, 2006, Campana filed a breach of contract complaint in the Bedford Municipal Court against Harvey Slomovitz ("Slomovitz") and Boulevard Title, Inc. ("Boulevard Title"). In the complaint, Campana alleged that on May 17, 2005, he and Slomovitz entered into a joint enterprise, as equal partners, to perform certain repairs and construction to a home located in Solon, Ohio for the sum of $14,800.

{¶4} Campana also alleged that after the project was completed, Slomovitz failed to pay him the agreed upon share of the proceeds. In addition, Campana alleged that as a result of Slomovitz's failure to pay, Campana filed a mechanic's lien on the property where the work was done.

{¶5} Campana further alleged that upon the sale of the home, Boulevard Title, the company handling the real estate closing, established an escrow account in the amount of $5,300 to satisfy the lien. Finally, Campana alleged that he discovered that Slomovitz's construction company, H. Allen Construction, Inc., has no assets and is judgment proof.

Bench Trial

{¶6} On May 22, 2007, a bench trial was held. After Boulevard Title paid the escrow amount of $5,300 to the court, it was dismissed from the case prior to the trial.

Campana represented himself.

{¶7} At trial, the evidence established that on or about May 17, 2005, Campana procured a contract to do repairs and construction work on a home that was in the process of being sold. Subsequently, Campana and Slomovitz entered into an oral contract, whereby Slomovitz would be the subcontractor for the project, and the two men would split the net proceeds equally. The total amount of the project was established to be $17,800.

{¶8} Slomovitz testified that he paid Campana the sum of $5,573. Slomovitz testified that he paid Campana in cash, because Campana claimed he did not have an account. Slomovitz testified that he paid Campana the above sum in two payments of $3,900 and $1,673, respectively. Slomovitz testified that on those occasions, he made out a check payable to "cash," presented it to his bank, and then gave the proceeds to Campana. Copies of the two cancelled checks were entered into evidence.

{¶9} Campana testified that Slomovitz never paid him the $5,300. Campana testified as follows:

"Mr. Campana: I was to be paid one half of the project.

The Court: The net proceeds?

Mr. Campana: Well, that's a debated item because this project, your Honor, was actually - - I was the lead bidder, I was suppose to get 10 percent for getting the lead, and I was the main salesperson. A salesman gets - - in the industry gets 12 percent off the top for selling the project. And then you split your profits after that. A ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.