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.

Pierce v. Louis Electric

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Fifth District

September 23, 2013

FLETCHER PIERCE Plaintiff-Appellant
v.
LOUIS ELECTRIC Defendant-Appellee

Civil Appeal from the Canton Municipal Court, Case No. 2013 CVI 00167

For Plaintiff-Appellant FLETCHER PIERCE, PRO SE

For Defendant-Appellee JOHN A. TSCHOLL

Hon. W. Scott Gwin, P. J. Hon. John W. Wise, J. Hon. Craig R. Baldwin, J.

OPINION

Wise, J.

(¶1} Appellant Fletcher Pierce appeals the decision of the Canton Municipal Court, Stark County, which granted judgment in favor of Appellee Joseph Louis, dba Louis Electric, in a small claims action concerning a dispute over a residential rewiring agreement. The relevant facts leading to this appeal are as follows.

(¶2} On January 9, 2013, Appellant Pierce filed a small claims complaint in the trial court, claiming that he had an oral contract with appellee to rewire a house on Lawrence Road NE in compliance with the pertinent building codes, provide separate electric service capability on the first and second floors, and add 220-volt service.

(¶3} The trial court scheduled a hearing before a magistrate for January 30, 2013. On February 8, 2013, after hearing the evidence, the magistrate issued a decision in favor of appellee.

(¶4} Appellant filed an objection to the magistrate's decision on February 19, 2013. The trial court thereupon overruled the objection and adopted the decision of the magistrate.

(¶5} Appellant filed a notice of appeal on March 13, 2013. Appellant filed his brief on May 13, 2013; appellee filed its brief on May 31, 2013.

(¶6} Although appellant's brief fails to comply with the Appellate Rules at numerous points, [1] in the interest of justice, we will interpret appellant's assigned errors as follows:

(¶7} "I. THE TRIAL COURTS DECISION IN FAVOR OF APPELLEE WAS AGAINST THE MANIFEST WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE.

(¶8} "II. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED BY PERMITTING APPELLEE TO INTRODUCE CERTAIN DOCUMENTS REGARDING THE ELECTRICAL ...


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.