MAXIM ENTERPRISES, INC. Plaintiff
STEPHEN T. HALEY, et al. Defendants and STEPHEN T. HALEY Appellant
STEPHEN A. MAXIM, et al. Third-Party Defendants and BAC FIELD SERVICES CORPORATION Appellee
FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS COUNTY OF
SUMMIT, OHIO CASE No. CV 2008 07 5093
STEPHEN T. HALEY, pro se, Appellant.
TURNER BAUTISTA, Attorney at Law, for Appellee.
DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
J. CARR, Judge.
Appellant Stephen Haley appeals, pro se, from the judgment of
the Summit County Court of Common Pleas. This Court reverses
and remands the matter for further proceedings.
This Court has previously summarized the history of this case
in a prior appeal:
Countrywide Field Services ("Countrywide") provided
real property inspections and maintenance services to
mortgage servicers. Countrywide contracted with Maxim
Enterprises, Inc. ("Maxim") to provide these
services on properties located in Ohio. Maxim subcontracted
this work to several subcontractors. The subcontractors
claimed to have provided services to the properties, but
denied having received payment from Maxim. Mr. Haley entered
into agreements with the subcontractors, wherein the
subcontractors assigned their accounts receivable and claims
to Mr. Haley. Mr. Haley claimed that he contacted Maxim for
payment and that Maxim responded that it had not provided
payment to the subcontractors because Countrywide had not
provided payment to Maxim.
In 2008, Maxim filed a complaint against several parties,
including Mr. Haley, wherein Maxim alleged that Mr. Haley
engaged in tortious interference with a business relationship
and civil conspiracy. Thereafter, Mr. Haley filed a
third-party complaint against several parties, including
Countrywide. This initial third-party complaint was dismissed
in 2009. Later that year, Mr. Haley again filed a third-party
complaint against several parties, including "Bank of
America fka Countrywide Field Services Corporation, "
("Bank of America"). Bank of America failed to
answer the third-party complaint, and Mr. Haley moved for
default judgment, which the trial court granted in 2010.
On April 16, 2010, Mr. Haley filed a praecipe for a writ of
execution against Bank of America dba Merrill Lynch. On April
28, 2010, "BAC Field Services Corporation"
("BAC") filed a motion to stay execution of
judgment. In its motion, BAC argued, in part, that it was
also known as "Bank of America Field Services, "
but it was "improperly named in the third party
complaint 'Bank of America f/k/a Countrywide Field
Services Corporation[.]'" BAC requested the court to
stay the proceedings to enforce the judgment pending the
disposition of a motion brought pursuant to Civ.R. 60. BAC
then filed its Civ.R. 60(B) motion, in which it again argued,
in part, that it was incorrectly named in the third-party
complaint as "Bank of America fka Countrywide Field
Services Corporation[.]" BAC maintained that "Bank
of America" was a non-entity, and that Bank of America
Corporation was its parent company and was never known as
"Countrywide Field Services Corporation."
The trial court granted BAC's motion in an order dated
June 18, 2010. [Subsequently, BAC filed an answer to the
third party complaint and cross claims against Maxim.] Mr.
Haley then attempted to appeal from the June 18, 2010 order,
and we dismissed his appeal for lack of a final appealable
order. See Maxim Ents., Inc. v. Haley, 9th Dist.
Summit No. 25459, 2011-Ohio-6734. [While the appeal was
pending, BAC filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings,
which it renewed following the dismissal of the appeal.]
Thereafter, the trial court issued another order granting
BAC's motion to vacate the default judgment, and
including language that there was "no just reason for
delay" pursuant to Civ.R. 54(B).
Maxim Ents., Inc. v. Haley, 9th Dist. Summit No.
26348, 2013-Ohio-3348, ¶ 2-5.
Mr. Haley appealed arguing "that the trial court erred
in granting BAC's motion to vacate judgment against
'Bank of America fka Countrywide Field Services
Corporation.'" Id. at ¶ 6.
In its order granting BAC's motion to vacate the
judgment, the trial court ruled as follows: "The [c]ourt
is satisfied that [Mr.] Haley's default judgment is
against a non-entity, to wit: Bank of America fka Countrywide
Field Services. BAC Field Services Corporation has now
appeared in the instant litigation and appears prepared to
defend itself against [Mr.] Haley's claims. The Court
finds in the interest of justice that the March 17, 2010