Court Opinion

ID: 9899266
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-16 16:10:58.864348+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:20:16.070256
License: Public Domain

[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