United States District Court, N.D. Ohio
OPINION & ORDER [RESOLVING DOC. 123]
S. GWIN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Creditor, ONB Ridge Villa One, LLC (“ONB”), seeks
garnishment of certain assets formerly in the possession of
Judgment Debtor, David Snider. Claimants,  the spouse and
children of Snider, argue that Snider lawfully transferred or
disclaimed any interests in the disputed assets, making
Claimants the lawful owners. In response, Creditor ONB claims
the transfers were fraudulent and that the property remains
subject to garnishment.
this opinion, the Court decides whether Snider's earlier
assignments of Snider's interest in various assets and
whether Snider's disclaimer of interests in certain
trusts, stops ONB's efforts to garnish that property and
February 2013, Judgment Creditor ONB sued Snider, alleging
fraud and conversion of money. Plaintiff ONB contended it had
entered a contract to have Snider's company construct an
expensive home in the Virgin Islands and that Snider's
company and Snider broke the construction contract and
misappropriated ONB construction payments.
March 2014, the parties settled the lawsuit with Snider
agreeing to pay $750, 000 to Judgment Creditor
In August 2015, after Snider's failure to satisfy his
debt to ONB, this Court granted ONB's motion to enforce
the Settlement Agreement. The Court entered a judgment against
Snider in the amount of $700, 000. That judgment remained
March 12, 2019, this Court issued a Notice of Garnishment to
the Trustees of various trusts associated with
Garnishees responded that Snider earlier assigned some of the
property and Snider earlier disclaimed his interest in
Claimants seek dismissal of the garnishment proceedings and
attorneys' fees and costs in respect to the present
following reasons, the Court GRANTS IN PART
and DENIES IN PART Third-Party
Claimants' request to vacate the garnishment order and
DENIES Third-Party Claimants'
Court previously garnished several trusts belonging to
Judgment Debtor Snider. The Snider Children Claimants allege
that Snider earlier disclaimed any interest in these Trusts
and that the Children Claimants now own Snider's former
interests in the Trusts. The Children thus argue that ONB
cannot collect from the Trusts proceeds.
Court largely agrees.
disclaimer . . . is final and binding upon all
persons.” “[N]o creditor of a disclaimant may
avoid a disclaimer.”
Creditor argues that the Trusts may still be garnished,
because Snider's disclaimers were fraudulent transfers.
However, Creditor ONB's argument runs into the explicit
Ohio Rev. Code § 5815.36(N)(2) language that states that
“[a] disclaimer is not considered a transfer or
support of its argument that a disclaimer can be avoided, ONB
relies on a 2013 Ohio Court of Appeals case. But that 2013
case used precedent that pre-dates the enactment of §
Court sees no reason to ignore the explicit language of the
statute. Under Ohio law, a disclaimer is not a transfer or a
conveyance and therefore ...