DocketNumber: No. 07CA33.
Citation Numbers: 2008 Ohio 1803
Judges: McFARLAND, J.
Filed Date: 4/7/2008
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/18/2021
{¶ 3} Appellant attached to his complaint an agreement dated September 17, 1997, which stated, in part, that it was "subject to the terms and conditions on the reverse side of this page." A second page, which may or may not have been the reverse side, stated: "We do not carry insurance *Page 3 on your items in storage." The second agreement is dated February 24, 2001, and again states that it "is subject to the terms and conditions on the reverse side of this page." A second page, which again may or may not have been the reverse side, stated: "We do not carry insurance on your items in storage. You must contact your insurance company for insurance on your items." The third agreement is dated November 6, 2004 and again states that it "is subject to the terms and conditions on the reverse side of this page." A second page states: "We do not carry insurance on your items in storage. You must contact your insurance company for insurance on your items." It also states in a separate paragraph: "We are not responsible for flood, tornado, blizzard, or other natural[ly] occurring acts, all of which have been a part of the Circleville and central Ohio climate and experience historically."
{¶ 4} In its answer, appellee alleged that appellant failed to include the reverse side of the three contracts, which included the following language:
"5. Your Own Insurance and Liability: You must carry your own insurance on property stored in the space. Any insurance proceeds payable to you as a result of loss or damage to property on the premises shall be for your sole benefit. Likewise, any insurance proceeds payable because of insurance purchased by us shall be for our sole benefit. We each waive any respective right to subrogation against each other. We will not be liable to you or to any other person for any loss, injury, or damage to you or any employee, agent or guest of yours, your personal property, or any other person arising from any *Page 4 cause whatsoever, including without limitation, any acts of negligence, improper construction or failure to repair any building or improvement on the premises.
* * * *
11. Relationship of Parties, Assignments, Subletting: We both agree that no provision in this rental agreement or any act of the parties will create any bailment or any relationship between us and you other than the relationship of a landlord and tenant. You have no right to assign this agreement or sublet the space without our written consent."
Appellee claimed that the foregoing language relieved it of liability for
damage to appellant's property.
{¶ 5} Appellee subsequently filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings. It claimed that paragraph 5 was "a complete release of liability."
{¶ 6} Appellant argued in his memorandum contra that none of the language in paragraph 5 is in any of the three contract documents that he signed.
{¶ 7} The trial court subsequently granted appellee's motion. The court found that paragraphs 5 and 11 relieved appellee of liability. Appellant timely appealed the trial court's judgment.
{¶ 9} I. "THE COURT ERRED BY GRANTING
*Page 5DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS."
{¶ 11} Appellee argues that even if the trial court should not have considered the document attached to its answer, the court's judgment was still proper. Appellee contends that the language contained in the documents appellant attached to his complaint show that appellant waived liability against appellee.
{¶ 12} We independently review a trial court's decision regarding a Civ.R. 12(C) motion for judgment on the pleadings. See Dolan v.Glouster,
{¶ 13} Here, the parties dispute which documents comprise the contract. Appellant attached six pages, consisting of three separate contracts, to its complaint. Appellee attached an additional document to its answer, but appellant denies that this document is a part of any of the contracts. Because this is a factual dispute, the trial court should not have considered the document appellee attached to its answer. Instead, it should have looked solely to the allegations of appellant's complaint.
{¶ 14} Because the trial court based its decision upon the existence of disputed contractual terms, we must reverse and remand its judgment so that it may consider the propriety of appellee's motion based solely upon the allegations in appellant's complaint and the attached exhibits.1 *Page 7
Accordingly, we sustain appellant's sole assignment of error and reverse and remand the trial court's judgment for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
JUDGMENT REVERSED AND THE CAUSE REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGSCONSISTENT WITH THIS OPINION. *Page 8
The Court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal.
It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this Court directing the Pickaway County Common Pleas Court to carry this judgment into execution.
Any stay previously granted by this Court is hereby terminated as of the date of this entry.
A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. Exceptions.
Abele, P.J. and Kline, J.: Concur in Judgment and Opinion.