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.

McCoy v. Michael Bullock Tarry House, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Ninth District, Summit

August 7, 2019

MORGAN MCCOY Appellant
v.
MICHAEL BULLOCK TARRY HOUSE, INC. Appellees

          APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS COUNTY OF SUMMIT, OHIO CASE No. CV-2018-07-2921

          MORGAN MCCOY, PRO SE, APPELLANT.

          STEPHEN J. CHUPARKOFF, ATTORNEY AT LAW, FOR APPELLEES.

          DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY

          JENNIFER HENSAL JUDGE.

         {¶1} Morgan McCoy appeals a judgment of the Summit County Court of Common Pleas that granted summary judgment to Michael Bullock and Tarry House, Inc. on his negligence, breach of lease, and harassment claims. For the following reasons, this Court affirms.

         I.

         {¶2} Mr. McCoy lives at an apartment complex operated by Tarry House, Inc. Mr. Bullock is the director of the facility. On May 5, 2018, the complex's property manager called the police about a vehicle in the parking lot that is owned by Mr. McCoy.

         {¶3} According to Mr. McCoy, because of the surveillance cameras at the apartment complex and the amount of time he had lived there, the property manager should have known that the vehicle belonged to him. Even if the property manager did not, Mr. McCoy believes that he should have inquired at each of the eight apartments before calling anyone and should have called a towing company about the vehicle instead of the police.

         {¶4} Following the incident, Mr. McCoy filed a complaint against Mr. Bullock and Tarry House (collectively "Tarry House"), alleging negligence, breach of the warranty of habitability, and harassment. He alleged that the apartment was infested by bedbugs, that it lacked hot water, and that Tarry House allowed its employees and other tenants to harass him because of his race. He also alleged that Tarry House had not properly screened its employees and tenants for drug, alcohol, or mental health issues. He later dismissed his claims regarding the bathroom and bedbug conditions. Following the close of discovery, Tarry House moved for summary judgment on Mr. McCoy's remaining claims. Mr. McCoy opposed the motion, but the trial court granted summary judgment to Tarry House. Mr. McCoy has appealed, assigning as error that the trial court incorrectly granted summary judgment to Tarry House.

ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR
APPELLANT'S BEING DENIED DISPOSITIVE MOTION AND/OR DENIED TRIAL WITH APPELLEE'S BEING GRANTED SUMMARY JUDGMENT (APP. A-1) BY THE JUDGE IN THE MATTER NOW BEFORE THIS COURT WAS AGAINST THE MANIFEST WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE AS PER OR UNDER ARTICLE IV SECTION 3 OF THE OHIO CONSTITUTION.

         {¶5} Mr. McCoy argues that the trial court should not have granted summary judgment to Tarry House. Under Civil Rule 56(C), summary judgment is appropriate if:

(1) [n]o genuine issue as to any material fact remains to be litigated; (2) the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law; and (3) it appears from the evidence that reasonable minds can come to but one conclusion, and viewing such evidence most strongly in favor of the party against whom the motion for summary judgment is made, that conclusion is adverse to that party.

Temple v. Wean United, Inc., 50 Ohio St.2d 317, 327 (1977). To succeed on a motion for summary judgment, the party moving for summary judgment must first be able to point to evidentiary materials that demonstrate there is no genuine issue as to any material fact, and that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Dresher v. Burt, 75 Ohio St.3d 280, 292 (1996). If the movant satisfies this burden, the nonmoving party "must set forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial." Id. at 293, quoting Civ.R. 56(E). ...


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.