Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Barger v. Elite Mgmt. Servs., Inc.

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided September 19, 2018No. C-70322Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partZayas, P.J.

{¶ 19} While I concur with most of the majority's opinion, I would reach a different result on Barger's claim for unjust enrichment.

Barger Asked EMS Not the HOA For the Certificate

{¶ 20} The majority states that Barger "had no choice but to pay" EMS because "she had to pay the fee or could not sell her house." However, this is not reflected in the record, and Barger's complaint does not allege that certification letters were not available from the HOA. Barger, as an owner of a lot in Fairfield Ridge Subdivision, was a member of the HOA pursuant to the declarations. Barger alleges in her…

2Cases cited6 opinions

Mitchell v. Lawson Milk Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1988
Fancher v. FancherOhio Court of Appeals · 1982
Lehigh Gas-Ohio, L.L.C. v. Cincy Oil Queen City, L.L.C.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2016
Munday v. Lincoln Hts.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2013
Richardson v. Clinical Computing P.L.C.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2016

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.