Opinion

Rua v. Shillman

  • 28 Ohio App. 3d 63
  • 28 Ohio B. 104
  • 502 N.E.2d 220
  • 1985 Ohio App. LEXIS 10368
Court
Ohio Court of Appeals
Filed
Sep 30, 1985
Status
Published
Author
Dahling
On the bench
Ford, Cook, Dahling
Cited by
3 cases

The opinion

Dahling, P.J.

I dissent in this case for the reasons stated in my dissent in related case No. 1220.

2

The Bainbridge Township Board of Trustees is relying on a technical argument that funds have not been certified. However, appellant Rua has a valid claim for good faith labor expended. So why haven’t the trustees, even at this late date, certified the funds so a legitimate debt can be paid?

In my view, the trustees directed Shillman to order the transcripts. These were for the benefit of the township. The trustees should pay Rua for the transcripts.

The case should be remanded to the trial court with instructions to order the trustees to have the funds certified and paid. Anything less is unjust and inequitable.

2

In that case I stated:

“In my view, the transcript should be paid by Bainbridge Township. The Bain-bridge Township Trustees ordered the transcript; Mr. Shillman was simply their intermediary. The transcript was for the benefit of Bainbridge Township not for any personal benefit of Mr. Shillman.

“Under no reasonable interpretation of the facts should Mr. Shillman be held liable.”

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.