Wright State Univ. v. Williams

[Cite as Wright State Univ. v. Williams, 2012-Ohio-5095.]
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF GREENE COUNTY, OHIO
STATE OF OHIO, WRIGHT STATE :
UNIVERSITY
:
Plaintiff-Appellee C.A. CASE NO. 2012-CA-0037
:
vs. T.C. CASE NO. CVF1200211
:
BRIAN WILLIAMS
: (Civil appeal from the
Defendant-Appellant Municipal Court)
:
.........
OPINION
Rendered on the 2nd day of November , 2012.
.........
CHARLES GEIDNER, Atty. Reg. No. 0076969, 15 West Fourth Street, Suite 250, Dayton,
Ohio 45402
Attorney for Plaintiff-Appellee
JAMES E. SWAIM, Atty. Reg. No. 0007362, 15 West Fourth Street, Suite 250, Dayton,
Ohio 45402
Attorney for Plaintiff-Appellee
Special Counsel to the Ohio Attorney General
BRIAN K. WILLIAMS, P.O. Box 8691, Newark, Ohio 43058
Pro Se Defendant-Appellant
.........
FROELICH, J.
{¶ 1} Brian K. Williams, pro se, appeals from a judgment of the Fairborn
Municipal Court, which granted a default judgment to the State of Ohio in the amount of
$5,085.44, plus statutory interest.
{¶ 2} On February 14, 2012, the State brought an action in the municipal court
claiming that Williams owed $5,085.44 for goods and services rendered to him through
Wright State University. The exhibits attached to the complaint indicated that Williams
owed a principal balance of $2,688.77, interest in the amount of $667.62, and collection
costs of $1,729.05. Williams was served with the complaint on February 28, 2012, as
reflected by a United States Postal Service delivery confirmation card.
{¶ 3} Williams did not respond to the complaint. Consequently, in April 2012,
the State moved for a default judgment. On April 12, 2012, the trial court granted the
motion and awarded a default judgment to the State in the amount of $5,085.44, with
statutory interest. Williams appeals from the trial court’s judgment.
{¶ 4} In his sole assignment of error, Williams contends that “the trial court erred
in granting plaintiff’s motion for summary [sic] judgment.” In his appellate brief, Williams
states that he enrolled in three classes at Wright State University in March 2004. At that
time, he was expecting to receive financial aid to cover the tuition, costs, and fees that were
associated with the classes. However, as the beginning of the quarter approached, Williams
noticed that his financial aid had not been awarded. He contacted the Office of Financial
Aid at Wright State University. Williams states that a financial counselor at the university
informed him that his financial aid would not be awarded because he had been placed on
probation. The counselor further indicated that his enrollment in the classes would be
canceled if he did not otherwise pay for the courses. Williams did not have the means to
3
pay for the classes, and he left Fairborn, Ohio. Williams asks this Court to review the
evidence attached to his appellate brief and to reverse the trial court’s judgment.1
{¶ 5} The trial court granted the State a default judgment, which is governed by
Civ.R. 55. That rule provides, in part:
When a party against whom a judgment for affirmative relief is sought has
failed to plead or otherwise defend as provided by these rules, the party
entitled to a judgment by default shall apply in writing or orally to the court
therefor[.] * * * If, in order to enable the court to enter judgment or to carry it
into effect, it is necessary to take an account or to determine the amount of
damages * * *, the court may conduct such hearings or order such references
as it deems necessary and proper and shall when applicable accord a right of
trial by jury to the parties.
Civ.R. 55(A). The decision to grant a default judgment is reviewed for an abuse of
discretion. In re Ball, 2d Dist. Montgomery No. 24786, 2012-Ohio-2095, ¶ 8.
{¶ 6} Civ.R. 12(A)(1) provides that a defendant must file an answer to a
complaint within 28 days after service of the complaint and summons. The record reflects
that Williams was properly served on February 28 and that he was required to file an answer
(or to request an extension of time for filing an answer) by March 27, 2012. Williams failed
to do so. Accordingly, the State was entitled to move for a default judgment, and the trial
court properly granted the State’s motion.
1
The State has filed a Motion to Strike Portions of Defendant-Appellant’s Brief Which Refer to Matters Outside the
Record of Appeal. In light of our disposition of Willliams’s assignment of error, the State’s motion is overruled as moot.
[Cite as Wright State Univ. v. Williams, 2012-Ohio-5095.]
{¶ 7} The trial court also was not required to hold a hearing on damages, because
the complaint and motion for default judgment clearly set forth the amount of damages and
demonstrate that the amount is ascertainable. E.g., In re Ball at ¶ 10. The State’s
complaint included documentation of the amount owed by Williams. One attachment to the
complaint indicated that the principal balance of $2,688.77 consisted of charges for the
overpayment of federal funds ($1,215.77), instruction and general fees ($1,189), health
insurance fee ($178), late payment fee ($100), and student legal services fee ($6). A second
attachment indicated that the remainder consisted of interest and collection fees totaling
$2,396.67. The court awarded the amount sought in the State’s complaint. In short, the
State’s complaint clearly set forth the amount owed, and the amount was supported with
documentary evidence. Accordingly, the trial court did not err in awarding $5,085.44 to the
State.
{¶ 8} Williams’s sole assignment of error is without merit.
{¶ 9} We note that Civ.R. 55(B) states that “[i]f a judgment by default has been
entered, the court may set it aside in accordance with Rule 60(B).” “To prevail on a motion
brought under Civ.R. 60(B), the movant must demonstrate that: (1) the party has a
meritorious defense or claim to present if relief is granted; (2) the party is entitled to relief
under one of the grounds stated in Civ.R. 60(B)(1) through (5); and (3) the motion is made
within a reasonable time, and, where the grounds of relief are Civ.R. 60(B)(1), (2) or (3), not
more than one year after the judgment, order or proceeding was entered or taken.” GTE
Automatic Elec., Inc. v. ARC Indus., Inc., 47 Ohio St.2d 146, 351 N.E.2d 113 (1976),
paragraph two of the syllabus.
{¶ 10} If Williams believes that grounds exist for setting aside the default
5
judgment, he may be able to file a motion with the trial court, setting forth reasons why the
default judgment should be set aside. We express no opinion on the merits of such a
motion.
{¶ 11} The trial court’s judgment will be affirmed.
..........
FAIN, J., and HENDON, J., concur.
(Hon. Sylvia Sieve Hendon, First District Court of Appeals, sitting by assignment of the
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Ohio).
Copies mailed to:
Charles Geidner, Esq.
James E. Swaim, Esq.
Brian K. Williams
Hon. Beth W. Root