[Cite as Coastline Ohio, LLC v. Extended Family Concepts, Inc., 2011-Ohio-811.]

COURT OF APPEALS 

STARK COUNTY, OHIO 

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT 

COASTLINE OHIO, LLC, ET AL. 

 Plaintiff-Appellees 

-vsEXTENDED FAMILY CONCEPTS, INC. 

DBA HEATHER RIDGE COMMONS 

 Defendant-Appellants 

JUDGES: 

Hon. William B. Hoffman, P.J. 

Hon. John W. Wise, J. 

Hon. Julie A. Edwards, J. 

Case No. 2010CA00113 

O P I N I O N 

CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Appeal from the Stark County Court of 

Common Pleas, Case No. 2010CV00917 

JUDGMENT: Affirmed 

DATE OF JUDGMENT ENTRY: February 22, 2011 

APPEARANCES: 

For Plaintiff-Appellees For Defendant-Appellants 

Coastline Ohio LLC 

COLLEEN M. O'NEIL JAMES M. MCHUGH 

NATHAN A. WHEATLEY JOHN D. RAMSEY 

ALEXANDER B. REICH Tzangas, Plakas, Mannos & Raies, LTD. 

Calfee, Halter & Griswold, LLP 220 Market Avenue, South 

1400 KeyBank Center Eighth Floor 

800 Superior Avenue Canton, Ohio 44702 

Cleveland, Ohio 44114 

For Receiver, SAK-Ohio 

NANCY A. VALENTINE 

JEFFREY A. BRAUR 

EMILY W. LAKKY 

Hahn Loeser & Parks, LLP 

200 Public Square Suite 2800 

Cleveland, Ohio 44114 
Stark County, Case No. 2010CA00113 2

Hoffman, P.J. 

{¶1} Defendant-appellant Extended Family Concepts, Inc. d/b/a/ Heather Ridge 

Commons appeals the April 8, 2010 Order of the Stark County Court of Common Pleas 

appointing Appellee SAK Management – Ohio, LLC as receiver. Plaintiff-appellee is 

Coastline Ohio, LLC. 

STATEMENT OF THE FACTS AND CASE 

{¶2} Extended Family Concepts, Inc. d/b/a Heather Ridge Commons 

(“Extended Family”) provides assisted living facilities to residents in Stark County. In 

August of 2007, Heather Ridge entered into a loan agreement with Affinity Bank, a 

California company later acquired by Pacific Western Bank from the Federal Deposit 

Insurance Corporation. In February of 2010, Coastline Ohio, LLC (“Coastline”) acquired 

all of the rights and interests of Pacific Western Bank through various agreements. 

{¶3} Following Appellant’s alleged default on the loan agreement, Coastline 

filed the complaint in this matter for collection on a note, foreclosure, replevin and 

appointment of receiver against Extended Family. 

{¶4} The trial court conducted an evidentiary hearing on the motion for 

appointment of receiver on March 17, 2010. 

{¶5} Via Judgment Entry of March 23, 2010, the trial court stated it was not 

convinced SAK Management – Ohio, LLC should be appointed receiver in this matter 

and ordered the parties to meet with Gregory F. McNulty III, CPA, JD of Bruner Cox, 

LLP to review Appellant’s financials and to determine whether or not the firm could act 

as receiver in this matter. It was later determined Bruner Cox, LLP could not be 

appointed as receiver due to a conflict of interest. 
Stark County, Case No. 2010CA00113 3

{¶6} As a result Appellee Coastline filed a motion for reconsideration of the trial 

court’s March 23, 2010 Judgment Entry requesting appointment of SAK as receiver 

citing the conflict of interest and SAK’s industry experience. 

{¶7} On March 30, 2010, the trial court issued an Order Appointing Receiver in 

which the court appointed SAK Management-Ohio, LLC, Inc., through Suzanne Koenig, 

its sole member, as receiver of all the assets and all real and personal property of 

Extended Family. 

{¶8} On March 31, 2010, Appellant Extended Family filed a motion for 

reconsideration of the court’s appointment of receiver by order of March 30, 2010. The 

motion cites the trial court’s March 23, 2010 Judgment Entry arguing the trial court 

found SAK Management-Ohio, LLC, through Suzanne Koenig, its sole member, an 

inappropriate appointment with all powers enumerated in Plaintiff’s proposed order. 

Further, Appellant Extended Family argued service of Appellee’s motion for 

reconsideration was not made upon counsel for Extended Family until March 29, 2010, 

therefore, Extended Family did not have adequate notice and/or opportunity to be heard 

before the trial court issued its order. 

{¶9} On Motion of Extended Family, the trial court stayed execution of the 

March 30, 2010 order pending hearing of Appellant’s motion for reconsideration. 

{¶10} On April 8, 2010, the trial court issued an order amending, in part, the 

order appointing the receiver, and vacating the stay of execution. The order amended 

the scope of authority of the receiver, but reaffirmed the decision to appoint SAK 

Management-Ohio, LLC, through Suzanne Koenig, its sole member, as receiver. 

{¶11} Appellant Extended Family now appeals, assigning as error: 
Stark County, Case No. 2010CA00113 4

{¶12} “I. THE TRIAL COURT ABUSED ITS DISCRETION BY ENTERING ITS 

APRIL 8, 2010 ORDER WHICH APPOINTED SAK MANAGEMENT-OHIO, LLC, AS 

RECEIVER AND GRANTED SAK MANAGEMENT-OHIO THE EXTENSIVE POWERS 

ENUMERATED IN THE STAYED MARCH 30, 2010 ORDER.” 

{¶13} Initially, we note, a trial court’s decision to appoint a receiver is reviewed 

under an abuse of discretion standard. Equity Centers Development Company v. South 

Coast Centers, Inc. (1992), 83 Ohio App.3d 643. An abuse of discretion means more 

than an error of law or judgment, it implies that the trial court’s attitude was 

unreasonable, arbitrary, or unconscionable. Blakemore v. Blakemore (1983), 5 Ohio 

St.3d 217. 

{¶14} Extended Family asserts the trial court’s March 23, 2010 Judgment Entry 

found SAK Management-Ohio, LLC to be an inappropriate selection for receiver. Yet 

Appellant’s brief admits the trial court “properly appointed a receiver after considering 

hours of testimony and other evidence at the March 17, 2010 hearing.” Appellant 

Extended Family has provided no authority to suggest the trial court exceeded its broad 

statutory discretion to define a receiver’s powers. 

{¶15} We find Appellant’s brief mischaracterizes the language of the trial court’s 

March 23, 2010 Judgment Entry asserting the trial court rejected or found SAK 

inappropriate for appointment as the receiver. The trial court’s Judgment Entry states, 

{¶16} “However, at this time the Court is not convinced that SAK ManagementOhio, LLC, through Suzanne Koenig, its sole member, should be appointed as receiver 

with all powers enumerated in Plaintiff’s proposed order. 
Stark County, Case No. 2010CA00113 5

{¶17} “Instead, the Court ORDERS the parties to meet with Gregory F. McNulty, 

III, C.P.A., J.D., of Bruner-Cox, LLP to review Defendant’s financials and to determine 

whether or not the firm is in a position to act as receiver in this matter.***” (Emphasis 

added.) 

{¶18} The trial court never made a finding SAK Management-Ohio, LLC was 

inappropriate for appointment as receiver. Rather, the trial court seemingly makes a 

preference for a local appointment instead of the out-of-town SAK. The statement the 

court is “not convinced” is not tantamount to a finding of “inappropriate” or rejection. 

Upon discovery of a conflict of interest with Bruner Cox, the trial court then proceeded to 

reconsider and appoint SAK Management-Ohio, LLC. 

{¶19} Appellant thinly veils the procedural history asserting the trial court did not 

afford Appellant notice or an opportunity to be heard. However, a review of the record 

demonstrates the trial court stayed execution of its March 30, 2010 Order pending a 

hearing on Appellant’s motion for reconsideration. The trial court issued an order 

amending in part the order appointing the receiver on April 8, 2010, which indicates the 

trial court further considered the matter based upon the April 5, 2010 hearing. We find 

the trial court provided Appellant Extended Family notice and opportunity to be heard 

before issuing its April 8, 2010 Order. 
Stark County, Case No. 2010CA00113 6

{¶20} We do not find the trial court abused its discretion in appointing SAK 

Management-Ohio LLC as receiver in this matter, and Appellant Extended Family’s sole 

assignment of error is overruled. 

By: Hoffman, P.J. 

Wise, J. and 

Edwards, J. concur 

 s/ William B. Hoffman _________________

 HON. WILLIAM B. HOFFMAN 

 s/ John W. Wise _____________________

 HON. JOHN W. WISE 

 s/ Julie A. Edwards___________________

 HON. JULIE A. EDWARDS 
Stark County, Case No. 2010CA00113 7

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR STARK COUNTY, OHIO 

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT 

COASTLINE OHIO, LLC, ET AL. : 

 : 

 Plaintiff-Appellees : 

 : 

-vs- : JUDGMENT ENTRY 

 : 

EXTENDED FAMILY CONCEPTS, INC. : 

DBA HEATHER RIDGE COMMONS : 

 : 

 Defendant-Appellants : Case No. 2010CA00113 

 For the reasons stated in our accompanying Opinion, the judgment of the Stark 

County Court of Common Pleas is affirmed. Costs to Appellant. 

 s/ William B. Hoffman _________________

 HON. WILLIAM B. HOFFMAN 

 s/ John W. Wise _____________________

 HON. JOHN W. WISE 

 s/ Julie A. Edwards ___________________

 HON. JULIE A. EDWARDS