Eubanks v. Simons ( 2018 )


Menu:
  • [Cite as Eubanks v. Simons, 
    2018-Ohio-519
    .]
    IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO
    SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
    CLARK COUNTY
    DORIS EUBANKS AND MARTHA                           :
    ROSE                                               :
    :   Appellate Case No. 2017-CA-50
    Plaintiffs-Appellees                       :
    :   Trial Court Case No. 16-CVI-2984
    v.                                                 :
    :   (Civil Appeal from
    JUDITH SIMONS AND SHAWN                            :    Municipal Court)
    SIMONS                                             :
    :
    Defendants-Appellant
    ...........
    OPINION
    Rendered on the 9th day of February, 2018.
    ...........
    DORIS EUBANKS AND MARTHA ROSE, 1833 W. Main Street, Springfield, Ohio 45504
    Plaintiffs-Appellees, Pro Se
    JUDITH SIMONS AND SHAWN SIMONS, 120 S. Russell Street, Apt. D, Urbana, Ohio
    43078
    Defendants-Appellant, Pro Se
    .............
    -2-
    HALL, J.
    {¶ 1} Shawn Simons appeals pro se from the trial court’s judgment entry finding
    him liable to plaintiffs-appellees Doris Eubanks and Martha Rose for damage to their
    automobiles.1
    {¶ 2} In his sole assignment of error, Simons contends the trial court’s judgment is
    not supported by legally sufficient evidence. Specifically, he claims the record contains
    no evidence that he was driving a vehicle that struck and damaged the appellees’
    unoccupied, parked cars. Simons asserts that he was not driving, that no one saw him
    driving, and that he did not receive a citation. Absent any evidence that he was driving
    the vehicle that hit the appellees’ cars, Simons argues that the trial court erred in finding
    him liable for damages.
    {¶ 3} The record reflects that the appellees filed an amended small-claims
    complaint against Shawn and Judith Simons for the damage to their vehicles. (Doc. #8).
    The case proceeded to trial before a magistrate on April 11, 2017. (Doc. #14). All parties
    appeared without counsel and presented evidence. (Id.). After hearing the evidence, the
    magistrate determined that the claim against Judith Simons should be dismissed. The
    magistrate also found the appellees entitled to judgment against Shawn Simons in the
    amount of $5,420 plus costs. (Id.). No objections were filed. Thereafter, the trial court
    dismissed the claim against Judith Simons and entered judgment for $5,420 in favor of
    the appellees and against Shawn Simons. This appeal followed.
    1 Although Judith Simons’ name appears in the caption on appeal, she did not join in
    the notice of appeal. (Doc. #16). In fact, the notice of appeal states that she is not a
    party to the appeal because she was found not liable below. We have retained her
    name in the caption only because she was identified as a party in the caption of the
    judgment from which Shawn Simons has appealed.
    -3-
    {¶ 4} Having reviewed the record, we note that Shawn Simons has not caused to
    be prepared or filed a transcript of the proceedings before the magistrate. He also has
    failed to file an acceptable alternative under App.R. 9. Although he twice has attempted
    to file his own affidavit as a statement of the evidence, we rejected those affidavits on
    both occasions, finding the requirements of the rule not satisfied. (See Sept. 14, 2017
    Decision and Entry and November 7, 2017 Decision and Entry). On the second occasion,
    we noted that Simons still had not filed a transcript of the proceedings or an acceptable
    affidavit in lieu of a transcript in compliance with App.R. 9. That being so, we deemed the
    record complete and ordered briefing to proceed.
    {¶ 5} Because Simons has not provided us with a transcript of the proceedings or
    an acceptable substitute under App.R. 9, we have nothing to review and therefore cannot
    conclude that the trial court erred in finding him liable to the appellees. It is the duty of the
    appellant to provide a transcript or acceptable substitute because the appellant is required
    to show the error he claims the trial court made. Wolf v. Rothstein, 
    2016-Ohio-5441
    , 
    61 N.E.3d 1
    , ¶ 6 (2d Dist.). Under these circumstances, we must presume regularity of the
    proceedings below and affirm the trial court’s judgment. Namenyi v. Tomasello, 2d Dist.
    Greene No. 2013-CA-75, 
    2014-Ohio-4509
    , ¶ 26-29.
    {¶ 6} In his brief Simons claims that no traffic citation was issued for the collisions.
    But this is a civil case that rises or falls on its own merits and whether a citation was
    issued arising from an accident doesn’t matter because that is not admissible. Wolfe v.
    Baskin, 
    137 Ohio St. 284
    , 
    28 N.E.2d 629
     (1940); Barge v. House, 
    94 Ohio App. 515
    , 
    110 N.E.2d 425
     (2d Dist.1952). Furthermore we cannot accept as fact his statements in his
    brief that he appeared at the scene after the accident because there is no transcript to
    -4-
    verify what evidence was actually presented at trial.
    {¶ 7} The assignment of error is overruled.
    {¶ 8} Judgment in favor of Doris Eubanks and Martha Rose and against Shawn
    Simons for $5,420.00 and court costs is affirmed.
    .............
    FROELICH, J. and TUCKER, J., concur.
    Copies mailed to:
    Doris Eubanks
    Martha Rose
    Judith Simons
    Shawn Simons
    Hon. Robert E. Messham, Jr.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 2017-CA-50

Judges: Hall

Filed Date: 2/9/2018

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/9/2018