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.

Saez Associates, Inc. v. Global Reader Services

October 6, 2011

SAEZ ASSOCIATES, INC. PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE
v.
GLOBAL READER SERVICES, INC., ET AL. DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS



Civil Appeal from the Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court Case No. CV-728988

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

Cite as Saez Assoc., Inc. v. Global Reader Servs., Inc.,

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION

JUDGMENT:

REVERSED AND REMANDED

BEFORE: Blackmon, J., Kilbane, A.J., and Celebrezze, J.

{¶1} In this accelerated appeal, appellants Global Reader Services, Inc. ("Global"), Displays Plus, Inc. ("Displays"), and Andrew Lachowicz ("Lachowicz") appeal the trial court's granting of summary judgment in favor of appellee Saez Associates, Inc. ("Saez") and assign the following error for our review:

{¶2} "I. Whether the trial court erred in granting plaintiff's motion for summary judgment where the evidence shows there are genuine issues of material fact upon which reasonable minds can differ."

{¶3} Having reviewed the facts and relevant law, we reverse the trial court's decision and remand for further proceedings consistent with this court's opinion. The apposite facts follow.

Facts

{¶4} Lachowicz was the director, president, and sole shareholder of Global and Displays. Global was a telemarketing company and Displays was in the business of installing cabinets. Displays entered into a joint venture with Saez where Saez would bid on jobs on behalf of Displays. Once a contract was awarded to Displays, it would pay Saez a commission.

{¶5} On November 13, 2007, Saez submitted a proposal to Tompkins Builders for a cabinet project. Saez claims that Tompkins awarded the contract to Displays in the amount of $420,000; therefore, Displays owed Saez a commission in the amount of $46,585.39. Displays failed to pay the commission; therefore, Saez brought an action in Florida for the payment. Default judgment was entered against Displays.

{¶6} On June 10, 2010, Saez filed a complaint in the Cuyahoga County Common Pleas court seeking to set aside Displays' transfer of $50,000 to Global on February 26, 2007; Saez contended the transfer was fraudulent. Saez filed a motion for summary judgment that was opposed by Displays. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Saez after concluding "five badges of fraud" pursuant to R.C. 1336.04(B) existed.

Motion for Summary Judgment

{ΒΆ7} In its sole assigned error, Displays argues that the trial court erred by granting summary judgment in favor of Saez. Specifically, Displays argues there was no evidence it had the ...


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.