Bryant M. Properties, L.L.C. v. Graves
This text of 2023 Ohio 4127 (Bryant M. Properties, L.L.C. v. Graves) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
[Cite as Bryant M. Properties, L.L.C. v. Graves, 2023-Ohio-4127.]
COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO
EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
BRYANT M PROPERTIES LLC, :
Plaintiff-Appellee, : No. 112527 v. :
LAVERA GRAVES, :
Defendant-Appellant. :
JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED RELEASED AND JOURNALIZED: November 16, 2023
Civil Appeal from the Bedford Municipal Court Case No. CV-22CVF04607
Appearances:
Robert Edelstein, for appellee.
LaVera Graves, pro se.
LISA B. FORBES, J.:
LaVera Graves (“Graves”), acting pro se, appeals the trial court’s
journal entry granting $3,104.38 in damages to Bryant M Properties LLC (“Bryant
Properties”). After reviewing the facts of the case and the pertinent law, we affirm. A. Facts and Procedural History
Bryant Properties filed a complaint for damages and unpaid rent in
the Bedford Municipal Court. In its complaint, Bryant Properties alleged that
Graves “breached the provisions of her rental agreement by failing to make the
rental payments required thereunder in a timely fashion * * *.” The complaint
further alleged that Graves owed “$1415.56 of back rent, utilities and late fees” and
claimed “damage to the premises” by Graves.
The matter proceeded to trial on February 8, 2023.
Following trial, the court issued a journal entry finding in favor of
Bryant Properties in the amount of $3,104.38. It is from this order that Graves
appeals arguing that “Bryant M Properties LLC states that I * * * owe rent to them.
* * * I feel that I shouldn’t have to pay if I was being threaten[ed] or force[d] to
move.”
B. Law and Analysis
The Ohio Supreme Court has “repeatedly declared that ‘pro se
litigants * * * must follow the same procedures as litigants represented by counsel.’
State ex rel. Gessner v. Vore, 123 Ohio St.3d 96, 2009-Ohio-4150, 914 N.E.2d 376,
¶ 5.” State ex rel. Neil v. French, 153 Ohio St.3d 271, 2018-Ohio-2692, 104 N.E.3d
764, ¶ 10. Furthermore, Ohio courts have consistently held that pro se litigants “are
presumed to have knowledge of the law and legal procedure and * * * they are held
to the same standard as litigants who are represented by counsel.” Sabouri v. Ohio Dept. of Job & Family Servs., 145 Ohio App.3d 651, 654, 763 N.E.2d 1238 (10th
Dist.2001).
App.R. 16(A)(7) requires an appellant to include in the appellate brief
“[a]n argument containing the contentions of the appellant with respect to each
assignment of error presented for review and the reasons in support of the
contentions, with citations to the authorities, statutes, and parts of the record on
which appellant relies.” An appellant’s “failure to offer relevant citations to the
record to support its appellate arguments is a fatal flaw.” In re Fuel Adjustment
Clauses for Columbus S. Power Co., 140 Ohio St.3d 352, 2014-Ohio-3764, 18 N.E.3d
1157, ¶ 36. “‘An appellate court may disregard an assignment of error pursuant to
App.R. 12(A)(2) if the party raising it fails to identify in the record the error on which
the assignment of error is based or fails to argue the assignment separately in the
brief, as required under App.R. 16(A).’” Baxter v. Thomas, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga
No. 101186, 2015-Ohio-2148, ¶ 54, quoting Rodriguez v. Rodriguez, 8th Dist.
Cuyahoga No. 91412, 2009-Ohio-3456, ¶ 4.
“Pursuant to App.R. 9(B), the appellant has a duty to file the
transcript from any lower court proceedings to the extent it is necessary for
evaluation of the judgment being appealed.” Farmer v. Healthcare Bridge, 8th Dist.
Cuyahoga No. 110469, 2021-Ohio-3207, ¶ 6. Parties may also file an alternative
record in the absence of a transcript. Pursuant to App.R. 9(C), if the proceedings
were not recorded, a transcript is unavailable, or a recording was made but no longer
available, “the appellant may prepare a statement of the evidence or proceedings from the best available means, including the appellant’s recollection. The statement
shall be served on the appellee no later than twenty days prior to the time for
transmission of the record[.]” Similarly, App.R. 9(D) permits the parties to file an
agreed statement of the record on appeal. “[A]bsent a transcript or alternative
record under App.R. 9(C) or (D), we must presume regularity in the proceedings
below.” Lakewood v. Collins, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 102953, 2015-Ohio-4389, ¶ 9.
Graves does not provide any citation to the record and does not
provide citations to relevant legal authority in support of her argument.
Importantly, Graves does not identify an error she believes the court made below,
though she does appear to dispute the verdict. Further, she did not provide a
transcript or alternative record for our review.
On appeal, Graves does not dispute that she entered into a lease with
Bryant Properties that ran through July 2023. She further does not dispute that she
moved prior to the end of lease. In her appeal, Graves appears to challenge the
court’s damages award. Without a transcript of the trial or alternate record, we are
unable review the propriety of the court’s award.
In light of the foregoing, Graves’s appeal is not well taken.
Judgment affirmed.
It is ordered that appellee recover from appellant costs herein taxed.
The court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal.
It is ordered that a special mandate be sent to said court to carry this judgment
into execution. A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27
of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.
LISA B. FORBES, JUDGE
MARY EILEEN KILBANE, P.J., and SEAN C. GALLAGHER, J., CONCUR
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2023 Ohio 4127, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bryant-m-properties-llc-v-graves-ohioctapp-2023.