Creative Concrete v. Dg Pools, 07 Ma 163 (6-26-2008)
2008-Ohio-3338 (2008)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An appellate court will not reverse a trial court's judgment as being against the manifest weight of the evidence if the judgment is supported by some competent, credible evidence on all essential elements of the case. A reviewing court must give significant deference to the trier of fact's determinations of witness credibility.
Facts:
- In 2005, Thomas and Connie Korner contracted with DG Pools to replace the concrete surrounding their pool.
- DG Pools subcontracted the concrete work to Creative Concrete for $6,270, specifying colored concrete with a broom finish and fiber mesh reinforcement.
- After Creative Concrete completed the work, the Korners complained that the concrete was uneven, lumpy, and did not properly abut the pool cover tracks.
- DG Pools attempted to remedy the issues by grinding the concrete but was unsuccessful.
- DG Pools and the Korners ultimately agreed to tear out the concrete and have it replaced by another subcontractor, Ross Lago.
- Due to the alleged defects, DG Pools refused to pay Creative Concrete the agreed-upon contract price of $6,270.
Procedural Posture:
- Creative Concrete filed a complaint against DG Pools in Mahoning County Court (a small claims court) seeking payment of the contract price.
- DG Pools filed an answer and a counterclaim for $21,978 to cover the cost of removing and replacing the concrete.
- Because the counterclaim exceeded the small claims court's jurisdictional limit, the case was transferred to the Mahoning County Common Pleas Court (the trial court of general jurisdiction).
- In the Common Pleas Court, the case was tried before a magistrate, who found in favor of Creative Concrete, concluding there was no material breach of the contract.
- The magistrate awarded Creative Concrete the full contract price of $6,270 plus prejudgment interest.
- Both parties filed objections to the magistrate's decision.
- The Common Pleas Court judge overruled the objections and adopted the magistrate's decision.
- DG Pools, as appellant, appealed the judgment of the Common Pleas Court to the Court of Appeals of Ohio, Seventh Appellate District.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Is a trial court's finding that a subcontractor's performance did not constitute a material breach of contract against the manifest weight of the evidence when the finding is based on the credible testimony of a competing contractor, despite contrary testimony from the homeowner?
Opinions:
Majority - Per Curiam
No. A trial court's judgment is not against the manifest weight of the evidence if it is supported by some competent, credible evidence. The court found that the magistrate's decision was supported by the testimony of Ross Lago, a competing contractor hired to replace the work, who testified that Creative Concrete's work was 'a payable job.' Although the homeowners testified about numerous defects, the magistrate was in the best position to weigh the credibility of the witnesses and found Lago's testimony to be 'particularly credible, trustworthy and compelling.' The appellate court must defer to this credibility determination and cannot substitute its own judgment, even if it finds the defendant's decision to replace the work to be logically sound.
Analysis:
This case reinforces the highly deferential standard of review appellate courts apply to a trial court's factual findings. It illustrates that a finding of fact, such as whether a breach is material, will be upheld so long as there is some credible evidence in the record to support it, even if conflicting evidence exists. The decision underscores the principle that the trier of fact (the magistrate in this instance) is the ultimate arbiter of witness credibility, and appellate courts will not second-guess those determinations. This precedent makes it significantly more difficult for appellants to succeed on a 'manifest weight of the evidence' challenge when the trial outcome hinged on conflicting testimony.
Unlock the full brief for Creative Concrete v. Dg Pools, 07 Ma 163 (6-26-2008)