Powells v. Radey ( 2012 )


Menu:
  • [Cite as Powells v. Radey, 
    2012-Ohio-163
    .]
    Court of Appeals of Ohio
    EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
    COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
    JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
    No. 96898
    CANDICE POWELLS
    PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE
    vs.
    RICHARD RADEY
    DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
    JUDGMENT:
    AFFIRMED
    Civil Appeal from the
    Cleveland Municipal Court
    Case No. 2008 CVI 030399
    BEFORE: Stewart, P.J., Celebrezze, J., and Keough, J.
    RELEASED AND JOURNALIZED: January 19, 2012
    ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT
    Daniel Walker
    White & Walker Co., L.P.A.
    75 Public Square, Suite 1310
    Cleveland, OH 44113
    FOR APPELLEE
    Candice Powells, Pro Se
    4511 Bush Avenue
    Cleveland, OH 44109
    MELODY J. STEWART, P.J.:
    {¶ 1} This case came to be heard upon the accelerated calendar pursuant to App.R. 11.1
    and Loc.R. 11.1, the record from the Cleveland Municipal Court and the brief and oral
    argument of appellant’s counsel.
    {¶ 2} Plaintiff-appellee Candice Powells brought this action against her landlord,
    defendant-appellant Richard Radey, alleging that he charged her rent beyond the amount
    authorized in his contract with the Section 8 Tenant-Base Assistance Housing Choice Voucher
    Program.   Powells’s lease was approved in the amount of $817 and she was originally
    provided with a housing assistance payment in the amount $699, leaving her to pay the
    remaining $118 due on the lease.   During the lease term, the housing assistance payment was
    increased to $817, yet Radey continued to collect $118 per month from Powells.     The court
    approved a magistrate’s decision awarding Powells $1,600 for her overpayment.         Radey
    appeals, assigning four errors that collectively challenge the weight of the evidence and
    complain that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel.
    {¶ 3} There is no transcript of the hearing before the magistrate.                   Civ.R.
    53(D)(3)(b)(iii) states that an objection to a factual finding, whether or not specifically
    designated as such, shall be supported by a transcript of all the evidence submitted to the
    magistrate relevant to that finding or an affidavit of that evidence if a transcript is not
    available.    Where the objecting party fails to provide the trial court with the transcript of the
    proceedings before the magistrate, the appellate court is precluded from considering the
    transcript of the magistrate’s hearing. State ex rel. Duncan v. Chippewa Twp. Trustees, 
    73 Ohio St.3d 728
    , 730, 
    1995-Ohio-272
    , 
    654 N.E.2d 1254
    .            Radey claims that the magistrate
    told the parties that the court’s recording device was broken, but even if that were true, he still
    had the responsibility to provide an affidavit of the evidence.     See Gumins v. Ohio Dept. of
    Rehab. & Corr., 10th Dist. No. 10AP-941, 
    2011-Ohio-3314
    , ¶10; Nelson v. Koester, 8th Dist.
    No. 96723, 
    2011-Ohio-5506
    , ¶7; App.R. 9(C).            Without a transcript or affidavit of the
    evidence, we cannot review the magistrate’s factual findings and must presume the regularity
    of the proceedings below.      See Albritton v. White, 2d Dist. No. 24027, 
    2011-Ohio-3499
    , ¶
    15.
    {¶ 4} Radey next argues that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel because
    his originally-retained attorney sent a different, unprepared, attorney to the trial before the
    magistrate.     Unlike the defendant in a criminal prosecution, a civil litigant has no
    constitutional right to the effective assistance of counsel. Goldfuss v. Davidson, 
    79 Ohio St.3d 116
    , 122, 
    1997-Ohio-401
    , 
    679 N.E.2d 1099
    .        If Radey believes the new attorney who
    represented him at trial before the magistrate fell short of professional standards, “remedies are
    available in a malpractice action.”   (Citations omitted.)   
    Id.
    Judgment affirmed.
    It is ordered that appellee recover of appellant her costs herein taxed.
    The court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal.
    It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this court directing the Cleveland
    Municipal 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.
    MELODY J. STEWART, PRESIDING JUDGE
    FRANK D. CELEBREZZE, JR., J., and
    KATHLEEN ANN KEOUGH, J., CONCUR
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 96898

Judges: Stewart

Filed Date: 1/19/2012

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014