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.

Grill v. Renovations

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga

March 1, 2018

SHAWN GRILL, ET AL. PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS
v.
ARTISTIC RENOVATIONS, ET AL. DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES

         Civil Appeal from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case No. CV-16-872875

          ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANTS Dustin S. Lewis Dan A. Morell Dan Morell & Associates, Co., L.P.A.

          ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEES For Artistic Renovations of Ohio, L.L.C., and Ken Perrin P. Kohl Schneider Abigail A. Greiner Colleen A. Mountcastle Gallagher Sharp, L.L.P. Clark D. Rice Koeth, Rice & Leo, Co., L.P.A.

          For All Seasons Appraisals, L.L.C. Cynthia Lammert Coakley Lammert Co., L.P.A. Richard T. Lobas.

          For Huntington Bancshares, Inc. Kathleen A. Nitschke Giffin & Kaminski, L.L.C..

          BEFORE: Celebrezze, J., Laster Mays, P.J., and Keough, J.

          JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION

          FRANK D. CELEBREZZE, JR., JUDGE.

         {¶1} Plaintiffs-appellants, Shawn and Brooke Grill ("appellants"), appeal the grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants-appellees, Artistic Renovations of Ohio, L.L.C., and its owner, Ken Perrin (collectively "Artistic"). Appellants argue that the trial court erred by applying the doctrine of res judicata and denying their Civ.R. 56(F) motion for an extension of time to file a brief in opposition to Artistic's motion for summary judgment. After a thorough review of the record and law, this court affirms.

         I. Factual and Procedural History

         {¶2} In 2013, appellants purchased a home in Independence, Ohio. They intended to substantially remodel the home before moving in. Appellants enlisted Artistic as the general contractor to complete the construction and remodeling work. The parties entered into a home construction/remodeling contract on January 28, 2014. A dispute arose regarding Artistic's work on the project.

         A. The First Lawsuit

         {¶3} As a result of the dispute regarding Artistic's construction/remodeling work, appellants filed a complaint against Artistic and Sue Perrin on October 3, 2014, in Cuyahoga C.P. No. CV-14-833782. Appellants asserted causes of actions for breach of contract, violations of the Ohio Consumer Sales Practices Act, fraud, unjust enrichment, alter ego, and negligence. On December 31, 2014, Artistic filed an answer and counterclaims against appellants for breach of contract and quantum meruit, seeking to recover for work completed on the project that appellants had not compensated Artistic for.

         {¶4} Despite the fact that Artistic counterclaimed for breach of contract and quantum meruit, appellants dismissed their complaint pursuant to Civ.R. 41(A)(1)(a) on January 12, 2016. A bench trial commenced on Artistic's counterclaims on January 20, 2016. At the close of trial, the trial court issued findings of fact and conclusions of law on March 25, 2016. The trial court concluded that Artistic failed to substantially complete the project within a reasonable time period, and thus, was not entitled to contractual damages. The trial court held that Artistic was entitled to an award in quantum meruit/unjust enrichment based on the reasonable value of the work it performed on appellants' property. The trial court awarded Artistic $18, 462.95.

         {¶5} On April 25, 2016, appellants filed an appeal challenging the trial court's judgment. Shawn Grill v. Artistic Renovations of Ohio L.L.C., 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 104383. On May 3, 2016, appellants voluntarily dismissed the appeal.

         B. The Second Lawsuit

         {¶6} On December 8, 2016, in Cuyahoga C.P. No. CV-16-872875, appellants filed a complaint against Artistic, All Seasons Appraisals L.L.C. ("All Seasons"), and Huntington Bank ("Huntington").[1] Appellants asserted causes of action against Artistic and Perrin for breach of contract, breach of warranty, violations of the Ohio Consumer Protection Act, fraud in the inducement, fraud in the performance, negligent misrepresentation, and unjust enrichment. Appellants asserted causes of action against All Seasons for breach of contract and negligence. Appellants asserted causes of action against Huntington for breach of contract and respondeat superior.

         {¶7} On February 17, 2017, Artistic filed an answer and a counterclaim alleging that appellants engaged in frivolous conduct pursuant to R.C. 2323.51(A)(2). On the same date, Artistic filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings, arguing that appellants' claims were barred by res judicata. On March 7, 2017, the trial court converted Artistic's motion for judgment on the pleadings to a motion for summary judgment.

         {¶8} Appellants filed a response to Artistic's counterclaim on March 13, 2017. Artistic supplemented its motion for summary judgment on April 3, 2017.

         {¶9} On April 26, 2017, appellants filed a motion for an extension of time to respond to Artistic's motion for summary judgment. Artistic opposed the motion for an extension of time on April 28, 2017.

         {¶10} On May 1, 2017, the trial court denied appellants' motion for an extension of time to respond to Artistic's motion for summary judgment. The trial court ordered appellants to file their brief in opposition to Artistic's motion for summary judgment on or before May 3, 2017.

         {¶11} On May 3, 2017, appellants filed a brief in opposition to Artistic's motion for summary judgment and a motion for an extension of time pursuant to Civ.R. 56(F). On May 11, 2017, Artistic filed a reply brief in support of its motion for summary judgment.

         {¶12} On May 13, 2017, the trial court granted Artistic's motion for summary judgment, concluding that appellants' claims against Artistic were barred by the doctrine of res judicata. It is from this judgment that appellants filed the instant appeal on June 9, 2017.

         {¶13} Appellants assign ...


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.