{"count":198805,"next":"https://www.courtlistener.com/api/rest/v4/search/?cursor=cz0yMy45Mzc4NCZzPTk5NDgyMzgmdD1vJmQ9MjAyNi0xMC0wOCZwPTI%3D&q=CONTRACTS+NOT+SPECIFICALLY+ENFORCEABLE&type=o","previous":null,"results":[{"absolute_url":"/opinion/1176654/contracts-funding-mortgage-exchange-v-maynes/","attorney":"Carl J. Nemelka, Salt Lake County Atty., John G. Avery, Ralph D. Crockett, Richard S. Shepherd, Deputy Salt Lake County Attys,, Salt Lake City, for defendants and appellants., J. Richard Bell, Bell & Bell, Salt Lake City, for plaintiff and respondent.","caseName":"Contracts Funding & Mortgage Exchange v. Maynes","caseNameFull":"CONTRACTS FUNDING AND MORTGAGE EXCHANGE, a Utah Corporation, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Darrell D. MAYNES, Director, Salt Lake County Building and Zoning Enforcement Department, Defendant and Appellant; CONTRACTS FUNDING AND MORTGAGE EXCHANGE, a Utah Corporation, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. BOARD OF SALT LAKE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, Defendant and Appellant","citation":["527 P.2d 1073","1974 Utah LEXIS 622"],"citeCount":1,"cluster_id":1176654,"court":"Utah Supreme Court","court_citation_string":"Utah","court_id":"utah","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"1974-11-04","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"13608","docket_id":1534906,"judge":"Henriod, Callister, Tuckett, Ellett, Crockett","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-21T02:14:57.462788Z","date_created":"2014-10-30T17:28:48.679417Z","score":{"bm25":59.15611}},"neutralCite":"","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":5855,"cites":[],"download_url":null,"id":1176654,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":null,"meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-24T05:26:54.703490Z","date_created":"2013-10-30T04:42:36.439119Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"5f7235437284360390f6b726e1edfe2b98af9f47","snippet":"\n527 P.2d 1073 (1974)\nCONTRACTS FUNDING AND MORTGAGE EXCHANGE, a Utah corporation, Plaintiff and Respondent,\nv.\nDarrell D. MAYNES, Director, Salt Lake County Building and Zoning Enforcement Department, Defendant and Appellant.\nCONTRACTS FUNDING AND MORTGAGE EXCHANGE, a Utah corporation, Plaintiff and Respondent,\nv.\nBOARD OF SALT LAKE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, Defendant and Appellant.\nNo. 13608.\n","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[1176654],"source":"LU","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":""},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/882829/harman-v-mia-service-contracts/","attorney":"For Plaintiff and Appellant: Paul M. Warren, Billings; A. Clifford Edwards, Edwards Law Firm, Billings., For Defendants and Respondents: William R. McNamer, McNamer, Thompson, Werner & Stanley, Billings.","caseName":"Harman v. MIA Service Contracts","caseNameFull":"STEVEN J. HARMAN, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. MIA SERVICE CONTRACTS and AMERICAN ADJUSTMENT COMPANY, INC., Defendants and Respondents","citation":["858 P.2d 19","260 Mont. 67","50 State Rptr. 954","1993 Mont. LEXIS 246"],"citeCount":11,"cluster_id":882829,"court":"Montana Supreme Court","court_citation_string":"Mont.","court_id":"mont","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"1993-08-19","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"92-270","docket_id":1064443,"judge":"Trieweiler, Weber, Harrison, Hunt, McCarter, Gray, Turnage, McDonough","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-21T01:02:51.889343Z","date_created":"2014-10-30T14:05:24.399028Z","score":{"bm25":45.485622}},"neutralCite":"","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[],"download_url":null,"id":9509304,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":null,"meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-23T21:01:13.858126Z","date_created":"2023-08-06T21:45:05.779209Z"},"ordering_key":1,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"","snippet":"\nJUSTICE TRIEWEILER\ndelivered the Opinion of the Court.\nPlaintiff Steven J. Harman filed his complaint in the District Court for the Thirteenth Judicial District in Yellowstone County to recover damages pursuant to a vehicle service contract entered into with a Billings auto dealer. Defendant MIA Service Contracts (MIA) was the original administrator of the contract ","type":"lead-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[9509304,9509305,882829],"source":"LCU","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":""},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/4720615/mcdougall-v-agcountry-farm-credit-services-pca/","attorney":"","caseName":"McDougall v. AgCountry Farm Credit Services, PCA","caseNameFull":"","citation":["937 N.W.2d 546","2020 ND 6"],"citeCount":7,"cluster_id":4720615,"court":"North Dakota Supreme Court","court_citation_string":"N.D.","court_id":"nd","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2020-01-23","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"20190140","docket_id":16752630,"judge":"VandeWalle, Gerald W.","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-11-26T18:21:54.538112Z","date_created":"2020-01-23T21:05:55.077518Z","score":{"bm25":35.16615}},"neutralCite":"2020 ND 6","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":5347,"cites":[896439,898917,899304,1042080,1154176,1533452,4397629],"download_url":"http://www.ndcourts.gov/supreme-court/opinion/2020ND6","id":4500942,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2020/01/23/mcdougall_v._agcountry_farm_credit_services_pca.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-11-26T18:21:54.506511Z","date_created":"2020-01-23T21:05:55.089806Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"9581aa6f14551886321eef2006d91635541eac76","snippet":"                Filed 1/23/20 by Clerk of Supreme Court\n\n                  IN THE SUPREME COURT\n                  STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA\n\n                               2020 ND 6\n\nMichael McDougall and Bonita McDougall,                Plaintiffs and Appellants\n     v.\nAgCountry Farm Credit Services, PCA,           Defendant, Third-Party Plaintiff,\n                                                                   and Appellee\n     and\nAny person in possession, and All persons\nunknown, claiming an","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[4500942],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"CONTRACTS","syllabus":"The statute of frauds does not bar a deceit claim made by a third party to an unenforceable contract, who is not seeking to enforce the alleged agreement."},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/3542949/stone-v-general-electric-contracts-corp/","attorney":"Greek L. Rice,  Attorney-General, by  Geo. H. Ethridge, \nAssistant Attorney-General,  J.H. Sumrall,  of Jackson, and  R.W.  Heidelberg,  of Hattiesburg, for A.H. Stone, Chairman State Tax Commission.\n\nSee briefs of State Tax Commission in A.H. Stone, Chairman, State Tax Commission, v. C.I.T. Corporation,  193 Miss. 344 , 7 So.2d 811 , and A.H. Stone, Chairman, State Tax Commission, v. Yellow Manufacturing Acceptance Corporation,  193 Miss. 338 , 7 So.2d 820 \n  Watkins  Eager,  of Jackson, for General Electric Contracts Corporation.\n\nObjections to constitutionality of Chapter 110, Laws of 1940, asserted in brief for C.I.T. Corporation, appellant, in C.I.T. Corporation v. A.H. Stone, Chairman of State Tax Commission, et al.,  193 Miss. 344 ,  7 So.2d 811 , are referred to and adopted.\n\nIf the tax in question is held to be privilege or excise tax, all doubts must be resolved in favor of the taxpayer and liability may not be imposed unless the same is free from doubt.\n\nThe appellee now adopts brief filed by C.I.T. Corporation upon the foregoing point in C.I.T. Corporation v. A.H. Stone, Chairman of State Tax Commission, et al.,  193 Miss. 344 ,  7 So.2d 811 .\n\nAssuming the tax in question to be a privilege tax, the transactions involved were had outside of the State of Mississippi, and if the statute should be construed and enforced as to impose liability upon the General Electric Contracts Corporation, appellee, therefore, such statute would violate the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States as well as the Fourteenth Section of the Bill of Rights of the State of Mississippi. The taxing power of a state may not extend beyond the boundaries of the state.\n\nSee briefs of appellee, Yellow Manufacturing Acceptance Corporation, in A.H. Stone, Chairman State Tax Commission, v. Yellow Manufacturing Acceptance Corporation,  193 Miss. 338 , 7 So.2d 820 .\n\nArgued orally by  R.W. Heidelberg, J.H. Sumrall  and  Geo. H.  Ethridge,  for appellant, and by  W.H. Watkins,  for appellee.","caseName":"Stone v. General Electric Contracts Corp.","caseNameFull":"Stone, Chairman of State Tax Commission v. General Electric Contracts Corporation.","citation":["7 So. 2d 811","193 Miss. 317","1942 Miss. LEXIS 84"],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":3542949,"court":"Mississippi Supreme Court","court_citation_string":"Miss.","court_id":"miss","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"1942-04-27","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"No. 34987.","docket_id":3415074,"judge":"McGehee, Alexander, Griffith","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-21T21:19:13.035164Z","date_created":"2016-07-05T22:26:24.784716Z","score":{"bm25":33.88731}},"neutralCite":"","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":4856,"cites":[101795,102809,102833,103287,103414,103627],"download_url":null,"id":3515230,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"/home/mlissner/columbia/opinions/mississippi/court_opinions/documents/4c9b3a6d5e3998fd.xml","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-25T07:38:50.708313Z","date_created":"2016-07-05T22:26:24.795873Z"},"ordering_key":2,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"3a9c64e6db4432acddd3388d6147369e72885abf","snippet":"This case furnishes occasion to apply the distinction urged in the specially concurring opinion in Stone, Chairman, v. General Contract Purchase Corporation, 193 Miss. 301, 7 So.2d 806, this day decided, wherein the view was expressed that since the appellee was doing business in this state and therefore liable to privilege tax therefor *Page 332 \nthere was no need to consider whether th","type":"dissent"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"APPEAL from chancery court of Hinds county, HON. V.J. STRICKER, Chancellor.","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[3515229,3515230],"source":"ZU","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":""},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/4644432/swmo-llc-v-eagle-rigid-spans-inc/","attorney":"Daniel J. Frisk, West Fargo, ND, for plaintiff and appellant., Christopher J. Nyhus, Bismarck, ND, for Eagle Rigid Spans, Inc., defendant and appellee., Charles L. Neff, Williston, ND, for Mon-Dak Plumbing and Heating, Inc., defendant and appellee., Samuel G. Larson, Bismarck, ND, for Ronald J. Koch d/b/a RK Electric, defendant and appellee.","caseName":"SWMO, LLC v. Eagle Rigid Spans Inc.","caseNameFull":"SWMO LLC, a North Dakota Limited Liability Company, Plaintiff and Appellant v. EAGLE RIGID SPANS INC., the General Contractor ; Mon-Dak Plumbing and Heating, Inc.; Ronald J. Koch D/B/A RK Electric, Defendants and Appellees Creative Image Concrete, Inc. ; And All Other Persons Unknown, Claiming Any Estate or Interest In, or Lien or Encumbrance Upon, the Real Estate Described in the Complaint, Defendants","citation":["2019 ND 207","932 N.W.2d 120"],"citeCount":2,"cluster_id":4644432,"court":"North Dakota Supreme Court","court_citation_string":"N.D.","court_id":"nd","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2019-07-31","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"20180407","docket_id":15994883,"judge":"Crothers","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-22T01:44:19.075972Z","date_created":"2019-07-31T19:07:07.302225Z","score":{"bm25":33.111725}},"neutralCite":"2019 ND 207","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":5324,"cites":[897070,899332,1845380,4238266],"download_url":"http://www.ndcourts.gov/supreme-court/opinion/2019ND207","id":4421685,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2019/07/31/swmo_llc_v._eagle_rigid_spans_inc..pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-25T17:41:04.359593Z","date_created":"2019-07-31T19:07:07.322877Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"503cf0521eec4cce16161efe37a7c67bef66f478","snippet":"\n\n\n  Crothers, Justice.\n \n\n  [¶1] SWMO, LLC appeals district court orders granting partial summary judgment to Mon-Dak Plumbing and Heating, Inc. and RK Electric relating to their work performed on a building owned by SWMO. The court awarded Mon-Dak $125,600 and RK Electric $114,242 from funds deposited into court by SWMO. SWMO claims disputed issues of fact precluded summary judgment. We affir","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[4421685],"source":"CU","status":"Published","suitNature":"CONTRACTS","syllabus":"On a motion for summary judgment, a court may not weigh the evidence, determine credibility or attempt to discern the truth of the matter. Chapter 35-27, N.D.C.C., provides procedures for obtaining a construction lien on improvements to real property and for the enforcement of the lien."},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/6521262/current-coal-contracts/","attorney":"","caseName":"Current Coal Contracts","caseNameFull":"Current Coal Contracts","citation":["63 Pa. D. & C.2d 503"],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":6521262,"court":"Pennsylvania Department of Justice","court_citation_string":"","court_id":"padeptjust","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"1974-01-14","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"Official opinion no. 2","docket_id":63451097,"judge":"Packel","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-22T10:01:11.030488Z","date_created":"2022-06-25T00:23:13.089844Z","score":{"bm25":31.683428}},"neutralCite":"","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[],"download_url":null,"id":6394923,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":null,"meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-26T19:41:03.692814Z","date_created":"2022-06-25T00:23:13.094168Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"","snippet":"\nPACKEL, Attorney General,\nWe have received a request for an opinion from your department asking whether the Department of Property and Supplies can negotiate a price increase for vendors *504of coal who have contracted to supply coal for the Commonwealth. Since the price of coal has increased substantially in recent months, the vendors will sustain losses on the","type":"lead-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[6394923],"source":"U","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":""},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/9446074/in-re-estate-of-goode/","attorney":"","caseName":"In re Estate of Goode","caseNameFull":"","citation":["2023 Ohio 4253"],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":9446074,"court":"Ohio Court of Appeals","court_citation_string":"Ohio Ct. App.","court_id":"ohioctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2023-11-27","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"9-23-12","docket_id":68035040,"judge":"Willamowski","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-23T01:18:29.027008Z","date_created":"2023-11-27T16:09:18.005205Z","score":{"bm25":29.982409}},"neutralCite":"2023 Ohio 4253","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[387386,3779164,6760169,6765423,9392523,9801702],"download_url":"https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/3/2023/2023-Ohio-4253.pdf","id":9903899,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2023/11/27/in_re_estate_of_goode.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-12-05T09:03:17.509212Z","date_created":"2023-11-27T16:09:18.025806Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"a5e86b1171a695a4365f29691344f3e42f34ad6a","snippet":"[Cite as In re Estate of Goode, 2023-Ohio-4253.]\n\n\n\n\n                      IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO\n                          THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT\n                              MARION COUNTY\n\n\n\n\nIN RE:                                                    CASE NO. 9-23-12\n\nTHE ESTATE OF:\nJUDITH GOODE, (JOANNE M. BROOKS,\nADMINISTRATOR)\n\n[STATE OF OHIO, OHIO DEPARTMENT                           OPINION\nOF MEDICAID - APPELLANT]\n\n\n\n                 Appeal from Marion County Common Pleas Cour","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[9903899],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"Third-Party Beneficiary Incidental Beneficiary Enforcement of Contract. Non-party to a contract may only enforce a contract if they are an intended third-party beneficiary. If merely an incidental beneficiary, there is no right to enforce the contract."},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/10332775/nationstar-mtge-llc-v-jessie/","attorney":"","caseName":"Nationstar Mtge., L.L.C. v. Jessie","caseNameFull":"","citation":["2025 Ohio 454"],"citeCount":1,"cluster_id":10332775,"court":"Ohio Court of Appeals","court_citation_string":"Ohio Ct. App.","court_id":"ohioctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2025-02-13","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"113932","docket_id":69637998,"judge":"E.T. Gallagher","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-02-13T19:12:30.099686Z","date_created":"2025-02-13T19:12:30.038470Z","score":{"bm25":29.40468}},"neutralCite":"2025 Ohio 454","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[3740984,3759547,4661260,6757801,6775969,8621722],"download_url":"https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/8/2025/2025-Ohio-454.pdf","id":10799363,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2025/02/13/nationstar_mtge._l.l.c._v._jessie.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-27T19:06:34.312550Z","date_created":"2025-02-13T19:12:30.054421Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"ebcf3c87da03bdc961d22fc0a422bd0d401ce437","snippet":"[Cite as Nationstar Mtge., L.L.C. v. Jessie, 2025-Ohio-454.]\n\n                               COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO\n\n                              EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT\n                                 COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA\n\nNATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, L.L.C.,                             :\n\n                 Plaintiff-Appellee,                     :\n                                                               No. 113932\n                 v.                                      :\n\nD’ANDRE L. JESSIE, ","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[10799363],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"Motion to enforce settlement agreement; issue of contract law; breach of settlement agreement; performance by nonbreaching party. Appellants cannot demonstrate the elements of breach of a settlement agreement because they themselves did not perform under the agreement. The trial court did not err in denying the motion to enforce settlement agreement."},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/6619102/howard-v-go-ahead-vacations-inc/","attorney":"","caseName":"Howard v. Go Ahead Vacations, Inc.","caseNameFull":"","citation":["2022 Ohio 2202"],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":6619102,"court":"Ohio Court of Appeals","court_citation_string":"Ohio Ct. App.","court_id":"ohioctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2022-06-27","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"2021-T-0041","docket_id":63550629,"judge":"Lynch","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-22T10:28:03.665732Z","date_created":"2022-06-27T18:09:03.117220Z","score":{"bm25":28.700062}},"neutralCite":"2022 Ohio 2202","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[108566,2701716,2705961,4111213,4254433,4675656],"download_url":"https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/11/2022/2022-Ohio-2202.pdf","id":6495460,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2022/06/27/howard_v._go_ahead_vacations_inc..pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-26T20:11:20.848396Z","date_created":"2022-06-27T18:09:03.130274Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"84bda19b0c3b2575a4705813f2c60dbdc7722bb2","snippet":"[Cite as Howard v. Go Ahead Vacations, Inc., 2022-Ohio-2202.]\n\n\n\n                IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO\n                          ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT\n                               TRUMBULL COUNTY\n\nCHERIE H. HOWARD,                                    CASE NO. 2021-T-0041\n\n                Plaintiff-Appellant,\n                                                     Civil Appeal from the\n        -v-                                          Girard Municipal Court\n\nGO AHEAD VACATIONS, I","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[6495460],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"CIVIL - forum selection clause noncommercial contract consumer \"less readily enforceable\" overreaching public policy unreasonable forum inconvenient forum de novo"},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/9567662/swan-v-villas-condominium-unit-owners-assn/","attorney":"","caseName":"Swan v. Villas Condominium Unit Owners Assn.","caseNameFull":"","citation":["246 N.E.3d 1031","2024 Ohio 2313"],"citeCount":3,"cluster_id":9567662,"court":"Ohio Court of Appeals","court_citation_string":"Ohio Ct. App.","court_id":"ohioctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2024-06-18","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"C-230517","docket_id":68863606,"judge":"Crouse","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-11-26T17:59:09.123567Z","date_created":"2024-06-18T13:07:06.569079Z","score":{"bm25":27.402979}},"neutralCite":"2024 Ohio 2313","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[1430140,2693241,2707483,3736273,4400266,8621722,11152889],"download_url":"https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/1/2024/2024-Ohio-2313.pdf","id":10034275,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2024/06/18/swan_v._villas_condominium_unit_owners_assn..pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-11-29T16:52:46.382739Z","date_created":"2024-06-18T13:07:06.587913Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"c446eb5d495be23d5ea5b3b46c182694c5efbf7a","snippet":"[Cite as Swan v. Villas Condominium Unit Owners Assn., 2024-Ohio-2313.]\n\n\n\n\n                    IN THE COURT OF APPEALS\n                FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO\n                     HAMILTON COUNTY, OHIO\n\n\n\n DARYL SWAN,                                        :      APPEAL NO. C-230517\n                                                           TRIAL NO. A-2101811\n GWENDOLYN BOGGS,\n                                                    :\n MARY EASON,                                           ","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[10034275],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT – MOTION TO ENFORCE – CONTRACT – MEETING OF THE MINDS: In the absence of evidence that the parties intended for a settlement agreement to be contingent upon the execution of a signed writing, the trial court did not err in granting a motion to enforce a settlement agreement that was only signed by one of the parties. The trial court did not err in granting a motion to enforce a settlement agreement where the parties reached a meeting of the minds as to all of the agreement's essential terms."},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/4605840/rabo-agrifinance-llc-v-sills/","attorney":"\n  Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP, by Michael Montecalvo, Winston-Salem, for plaintiff-appellant.\n , \n  No appellee brief filed.\n ","caseName":"Rabo Agrifinance, LLC v. Sills","caseNameFull":"RABO AGRIFINANCE, LLC FKA Rabo Agrifinance, Inc., Plaintiff-Judgment Creditor, v. Angela SILLS, Defendant-Judgment Debtor.","citation":["826 S.E.2d 800","264 N.C. App. 707"],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":4605840,"court":"Court of Appeals of North Carolina","court_citation_string":"N.C. Ct. App.","court_id":"ncctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2019-04-02","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"COA18-846","docket_id":14855294,"judge":"Dietz","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-22T01:32:18.963346Z","date_created":"2019-04-02T12:07:23.141047Z","score":{"bm25":27.116962}},"neutralCite":"","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[1705224,2221873,3435979],"download_url":"http://appellate.nccourts.org/opinions/?c=2&pdf=37746","id":4383093,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2019/04/02/rabo_agrifinance.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-25T17:14:20.056373Z","date_created":"2019-04-02T12:07:23.148196Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"03f99d9a66e1612a8ab413efce7d26afabc829f7","snippet":"\n\n\n  DIETZ, Judge.\n \n\n  Angela Sills, a farmer in Sampson County, applied for a loan from Rabo Agrifinance, LLC, an Iowa company that offers financing to farmers and other agricultural businesses. The loan contract included a clause providing that Sills consented to personal jurisdiction in the Iowa courts.\n \n\n  Sills later defaulted on the loan and Rabo obtained a default judgmen","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[4383093],"source":"CU","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act Consent to Jurisdiction Clause in Contract Choice of Law Interpretation of Contract Governed By Place Where Contract is Made"},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/8836043/in-re-industrial-wine-contracts-securities-litigation/","attorney":"","caseName":"In re Industrial Wine Contracts Securities Litigation","caseNameFull":"In re INDUSTRIAL WINE CONTRACTS SECURITIES LITIGATION","citation":["386 F. Supp. 909","1975 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14471"],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":8836043,"court":"United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation","court_citation_string":"J.P.M.L.","court_id":"jpml","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"1975-01-08","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"No. 188","docket_id":66102172,"judge":"Becker, III, Lord, Murrah, Robson, Weigel, Weinfeld, Wisdom","lexisCite":"1975 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14471","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-22T21:53:27.898946Z","date_created":"2022-11-26T15:33:08.080693Z","score":{"bm25":27.048803}},"neutralCite":"","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[],"download_url":null,"id":8821098,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":null,"meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-23T19:09:06.642864Z","date_created":"2022-11-26T15:33:08.085259Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"","snippet":"\nPER CURIAM.\nI. Background of the Litigation\nIn June of 1974 the Securities and Exchange Commission filed an enforcement action in the Eastern District of Virginia against Robert Dale Johnson, Ridge Associates & Co., John D. Schrott, Jr., Vortex Corporation, Resource Evaluation and Development, Inc., Canal Corporation, James L. Phillips and five other individuals. The SEC alleges that all defe","type":"lead-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[8821098],"source":"U","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":""},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/9355952/zinsmeister-v-ohm/","attorney":"","caseName":"Zinsmeister v. Ohm","caseNameFull":"","citation":["2022 Ohio 4787"],"citeCount":1,"cluster_id":9355952,"court":"Ohio Court of Appeals","court_citation_string":"Ohio Ct. App.","court_id":"ohioctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2022-12-30","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"21AP-684","docket_id":66691483,"judge":"Mentel","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-23T00:55:18.816240Z","date_created":"2022-12-30T16:07:06.344838Z","score":{"bm25":26.95033}},"neutralCite":"2022 Ohio 4787","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[4110349],"download_url":"https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/10/2022/2022-Ohio-4787.pdf","id":9351424,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2022/12/30/zinsmeister_v._ohm.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-27T05:37:08.129591Z","date_created":"2022-12-30T16:07:06.352180Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"5ebdcc609d95308f2f342303ce9187a7f053c83e","snippet":"[Cite as Zinsmeister v. Ohm, 2022-Ohio-4787.]\n\n                             IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO\n\n                                  TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT\n\n\nThomas Zinsmeister,                             :\n\n                Plaintiff-Appellant,            :\n                                                                 No. 21AP-684\nv.                                              :             (C.P.C. No. 19CV-6970)\n\nStephen Ohm et al.,                             :           (REGU","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[9351424],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"Judgment affirmed. The trial court did not err by granting appellee's motion to enforce the parties' settlement. The parties entered into an enforceable contract to resolve the litigation, and appellant provided no evidentiary support for his claim that he entered into it under duress."},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/9400436/bova-v-b-j-pools-inc/","attorney":"","caseName":"Bova v. B & J Pools, Inc.","caseNameFull":"","citation":["2023 Ohio 1680"],"citeCount":3,"cluster_id":9400436,"court":"Ohio Court of Appeals","court_citation_string":"Ohio Ct. App.","court_id":"ohioctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2023-05-16","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"22 MA 0033","docket_id":67405869,"judge":"Hanni","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-23T01:06:33.335790Z","date_created":"2023-05-18T19:07:57.585782Z","score":{"bm25":26.93788}},"neutralCite":"2023 Ohio 1680","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[2704759,3166784,3723130,4122761],"download_url":"https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/7/2023/2023-Ohio-1680.pdf","id":9395912,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2023/05/16/bova_v._b__j_pools_inc..pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-23T20:23:17.148161Z","date_created":"2023-05-18T19:07:57.623392Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"033a123812ab49765790f6b625e7ed94c83e23ae","snippet":"[Cite as Bova v. B & J Pools, Inc., 2023-Ohio-1680.]\n\n\n\n             IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO\n                             SEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT\n                                 MAHONING COUNTY\n\n                                      JOSEPH BOVA ET AL,\n\n                                         Plaintiffs-Appellees,\n\n                                                       v.\n\n                                   B & J POOLS, INC., ET AL,\n\n                                      Defendants-A","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[9395912],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"claims for breach of contract and unjust enrichment bench trial unjust enrichment claim could not stand when the parties have enforceable contract damages reduced to amount owed on breach of contract manifest weight of evidence did not support anticipatory breach"},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/9381002/smith-v-javitch-block-llc/","attorney":"","caseName":"Smith v. Javitch Block, L.L.C.","caseNameFull":"","citation":["209 N.E.3d 869","2023 Ohio 607"],"citeCount":2,"cluster_id":9381002,"court":"Ohio Court of Appeals","court_citation_string":"Ohio Ct. App.","court_id":"ohioctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2023-03-02","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"111532","docket_id":66924281,"judge":"E.T. Gallagher","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-11-26T17:56:08.248381Z","date_created":"2023-03-02T19:06:26.817384Z","score":{"bm25":26.377651}},"neutralCite":"2023 Ohio 607","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[22748,145878,612913,780384,931907,1302352,1391770,2542875,2602251,2621572,2628242,2634468,2691072,2804462,3741266,3775691,4113479,4252449,4295919,4302807,4494341,4924684,5156516,6753418,6758368,6776567,6786833,6787703,7250077,8410643,8621618],"download_url":"https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/8/2023/2023-Ohio-607.pdf","id":9376478,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2023/03/02/smith_v._javitch_block_l.l.c..pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-12-05T07:23:57.758025Z","date_created":"2023-03-02T19:06:26.827728Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"b747575af7d1a162d8c6b880a074fcfe7fce5638","snippet":"[Cite as Smith v. Javitch Block, L.L.C., 2023-Ohio-607.]\n\n                               COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO\n\n                              EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT\n                                 COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA\n\nKHADIJA SMITH,                                             :\n\n                 Plaintiff-Appellee,                       :\n                                                               No. 111532\n                 v.                                        :\n\nJAVITCH BLOCK LLC","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[9376478],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"Arbitration agent principal contract nonsignatory class waiver stay compel demand enforce mandate. The nonsignatory agent does not have the authority to enforce the arbitration provision based on the express and limiting terms of the contract. The trial court did not err in denying the agent's renewed motions to stay, compel binding arbitration, and strike class allegations."},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/3997784/chinn-v-weaver/","attorney":"Catherine S. Heid,  IV-D Contracting Attorney, Scioto County Child Support Enforcement Agency, for appellant.","caseName":"Chinn v. Weaver","caseNameFull":"CHINN, Appellant, v. WEAVER, Appellee","citation":["600 N.E.2d 1134","76 Ohio App. 3d 64","1991 Ohio App. LEXIS 5218"],"citeCount":1,"cluster_id":3997784,"court":"Ohio Court of Appeals","court_citation_string":"Ohio Ct. App.","court_id":"ohioctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"1991-10-23","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"No. 1929.","docket_id":3869926,"judge":"Grey, Abele, Stephenson","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-21T22:23:06.087141Z","date_created":"2016-07-06T07:11:31.884273Z","score":{"bm25":25.702944}},"neutralCite":"","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[],"download_url":null,"id":3751411,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"/home/mlissner/columbia/opinions/ohio/appellate_court_opinions/documents/b49c5566bfee333d.xml","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-25T09:59:40.739045Z","date_created":"2016-07-06T07:11:31.889645Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"a5bdccfc1ad04b3f615eb0b8cf14b288265b3398","snippet":"This is an appeal from a judgment of the Scioto County Common Pleas Court ordering appellant Gail Weaver Chinn to seek employment pursuant to a change of custody order. We reverse. *Page 65 \nThe parties were divorced on April 20, 1982. At the time of the divorce Chinn received custody of the minor child, Gretchen Weaver. In an entry filed on December 23, 1987, Gretchen's custody was changed from Chinn to Terry Lee Weaver. In 1989, Chinn filed a moti","type":"lead-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"Appeal from the Common Pleas Court, Scioto County.","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[3751411],"source":"ZU","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":""},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/4672753/parker-v-smith/","attorney":"","caseName":"Parker v. Smith","caseNameFull":"","citation":["2019 Ohio 4346"],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":4672753,"court":"Ohio Court of Appeals","court_citation_string":"Ohio Ct. App.","court_id":"ohioctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2019-10-24","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"107711","docket_id":16378266,"judge":"E.T. Gallagher","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-22T01:52:09.455658Z","date_created":"2019-10-24T20:09:08.087699Z","score":{"bm25":24.91185}},"neutralCite":"2019 Ohio 4346","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[1430140,6762271,6786976,6791742,9802163,11152889],"download_url":"http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/8/2019/2019-Ohio-4346.pdf","id":4450006,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2019/10/24/parker_v._smith.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-11-27T08:38:53.884359Z","date_created":"2019-10-24T20:09:08.110859Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"63893e93f1fef4ebe0f90f9934d9fa329abd1c3f","snippet":"[Cite as Parker v. Smith, 2019-Ohio-4346.]\n\n                              COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO\n\n                             EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT\n                                COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA\n\nKATHY PARKER, ET AL.,                              :\n\n                Plaintiffs-Appellees,              :\n                                                             No. 107711\n                v.                                 :\n\nROBERT SMITH, III,                                 :\n\n      ","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[4450006],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"Contract consideration void public policy coercion. Parties' settlement agreement was an enforceable contract even after court struck one of its provisions because there remained adequate consideration. There was no evidence of coercion to justify avoiding the contract."},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/7511811/investment-contracts-inc-v-jones/","attorney":"Joseph A. Gladney, Baton Rouge, for defendants-appellants., Edwin A. Smith, Jr., of Smith & Gau-din, Baton Rouge, for plaintiff-appellee.","caseName":"Investment Contracts, Inc. v. Jones","caseNameFull":"INVESTMENT CONTRACTS, INC. d/b/a Time Finance of Zachary v. Wilbert JONES and Louvenia Jones","citation":["230 So. 2d 262","1969 La. App. LEXIS 4967"],"citeCount":0,"cluster_id":7511811,"court":"Louisiana Court of Appeal","court_citation_string":"La. Ct. App.","court_id":"lactapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"1969-12-22","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"No. 7814","docket_id":64512798,"judge":"Ellis, Landry, Sartain","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-22T14:29:23.823206Z","date_created":"2022-07-29T02:58:22.977777Z","score":{"bm25":24.774517}},"neutralCite":"","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[],"download_url":null,"id":7435311,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":null,"meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-23T12:14:24.118095Z","date_created":"2022-07-29T02:58:22.982116Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"","snippet":"\nSARTAIN, Judge.\nPlaintiff, by confirmation of default, obtained a judgment against defendants. When plaintiff commenced garnishment proceedings to collect on the judgment, defendants instituted this present action to have the original judgment set aside on the grounds that it was obtained through fraud and ill practice on the part of plaintiffs’ attorney.\nThe trial judge held that defendants had failed to","type":"lead-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[7435311],"source":"U","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":""},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/4456220/koudela-v-johnson-johnson-custom-builders-llc/","attorney":"","caseName":"Koudela v. Johnson & Johnson Custom Builders, L.LC.","caseNameFull":"","citation":["2017 Ohio 9331"],"citeCount":3,"cluster_id":4456220,"court":"Ohio Court of Appeals","court_citation_string":"Ohio Ct. App.","court_id":"ohioctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2017-12-29","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"2017-L-024","docket_id":6249388,"judge":"O'Toole","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-22T00:50:26.588204Z","date_created":"2017-12-29T19:23:22.786882Z","score":{"bm25":24.410027}},"neutralCite":"2017 Ohio 9331","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[111091],"download_url":"http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/11/2017/2017-Ohio-9331.pdf","id":4233473,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2017/12/29/koudela_v._johnson__johnson_custom_builders_l.lc..pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-25T15:30:01.061550Z","date_created":"2017-12-29T19:23:22.797715Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"fc0ac258f95076b953ae36a46b3093ae91895682","snippet":"[Cite as Koudela v. Johnson & Johnson Custom Builders, L.LC., 2017-Ohio-9331.]\n\n\n                                  IN THE COURT OF APPEALS\n\n                              ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT\n\n                                      LAKE COUNTY, OHIO\n\n\nNICHOLAS KOUDELA, et al.,                             :          OPINION\n\n                 Plaintiffs-Appellants,               :\n                                                                 CASE NO. 2017-L-024\n        - vs -              ","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[4233473],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"CIVIL - motion to stay proceedings pending binding arbitration construction contract binding arbitration provision fraud in the inducement R.C. 1329.10(B) the arbitration provision is valid and enforceable."},{"absolute_url":"/opinion/9948238/alami-v-khalid/","attorney":"","caseName":"Alami v. Khalid","caseNameFull":"","citation":["2024 Ohio 2456"],"citeCount":1,"cluster_id":9948238,"court":"Ohio Court of Appeals","court_citation_string":"Ohio Ct. App.","court_id":"ohioctapp","court_jurisdiction":null,"dateArgued":null,"dateFiled":"2024-06-27","dateReargued":null,"dateReargumentDenied":null,"docketNumber":"113140","docket_id":68891437,"judge":"E.T. Gallagher","lexisCite":"","meta":{"timestamp":"2024-06-27T16:34:24.570067Z","date_created":"2024-06-27T15:19:28.024574Z","score":{"bm25":23.93784}},"neutralCite":"2024 Ohio 2456","non_participating_judge_ids":[],"opinions":[{"author_id":null,"cites":[3158447,3691312,4036454,6071664,6756195,6756244,6758337,9882754,9941040],"download_url":"https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/8/2024/2024-Ohio-2456.pdf","id":10414847,"joined_by_ids":[],"local_path":"pdf/2024/06/27/alami_v._khalid.pdf","meta":{"timestamp":"2025-10-27T17:24:10.980699Z","date_created":"2024-06-27T15:19:28.045731Z"},"ordering_key":null,"per_curiam":false,"sha1":"ff36959b963c30561fb8dbcec2fea1fd8065d1b6","snippet":"[Cite as Alami v. Khalid, 2024-Ohio-2456.]\n\n                              COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO\n\n                             EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT\n                                COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA\n\nALI ALAMI,                                         :\n\n                Plaintiff-Appellant,               :\n                                                               No. 113140\n                v.                                 :\n\nHASSAN KHALID, ET AL.,                             :\n\n    ","type":"combined-opinion"}],"panel_ids":[],"panel_names":[],"posture":"","procedural_history":"","scdb_id":"","sibling_ids":[10414847],"source":"C","status":"Published","suitNature":"","syllabus":"Settlement agreement default judgment Civ.R. 6(C)(1) may permissive mandatory damages reasonable certainty manifest weight harmless error. Trial court properly overruled oral motion for default judgment where defendants appeared in the action, defendants did not waive any defenses, and plaintiff failed to provide written notice of intent to seek default judgment. Trial court properly denied motion to enforcement settlement agreement even though it made a minor error of law in interpreting the contract because plaintiff failed to prove damages with reasonable certainty."}]}