327 N.E.2d 753 (Ohio 1975), 74-400, O'Brien v. University Community Tenants Union, Inc.

Docket Nº:74-400.
Citation:327 N.E.2d 753, 42 Ohio St.2d 242
Opinion Judge:CELEBREZZE, J.
Party Name:O'BRIEN, Appellee, v. UNIVERSITY COMMUNITY TENANTS UNION, INC., Appellant.
Attorney:Charles W. O'Brien, in pro per., Patchen, Murphy & Allison and Terrence J. Morse, Columbus, for appellant. Mr. Charles W. O'Brien, in propria persona., Messrs. Patchen, Murphy & Allison, and Mr. Terrence J. Morse, for appellant.
Judge Panel:C. WILLIAM O'NEILL, C. J., and HERBERT, CORRIGAN, STERN, WILLIAM B. BROWN and PAUL W. BROWN, JJ., concur.
Case Date:May 07, 1975
Court:Supreme Court of Ohio
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 753

327 N.E.2d 753 (Ohio 1975)

42 Ohio St.2d 242

O'BRIEN, Appellee,

v.

UNIVERSITY COMMUNITY TENANTS UNION, INC., Appellant.

No. 74-400.

Supreme Court of Ohio.

May 7, 1975

Syllabus by the Court

In order for a court to dismiss a complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted (Civ.R. 12(B)(6)), it must appear beyond doubt from the complaint that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts entitling him to recovery. (Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 78 S.Ct. 99, 2 L.Ed.2d 80, followed.)

On May 4, 1973, Charles William O'Brien filed a complaint against University Community Tenants Union, Inc., alleging, in pertinent part, that:

'5. Plaintiff says that the defendant, acting through its agents, has compiled a numerical list of at least ten landlords which list reflects those landlords about whom the defendant alleges it received the most complaints. Plaintiff says that said list is posted on a bulletin board and in plain view of the public and that said list has the effect of being a 'Blacklist.'

'6. Plaintiff further says that the defendant has files corresponding to each landlord on said list and that these files contain information which is false and defamatory as to the plaintiff and that such information is being disseminated to the public and prospective tenants in reckless disregard of plaintiff's rights. [42 Ohio St.2d 243]

'7. Plaintiff says that the defendant is misleading the public by not indicating to them that these complaints are merely unverified statements or phone complaints and may or may not be true.

'8. Plaintiff further says that defendant is advising prospective tenants not to enter into leases with the plaintiff based not only on information in these files but also because plaintiff has refused to enter into a contract with the defendant.

'9. Plaintiff says that the actions of the defendant are designed to coerce and intimidate the public into refusing to rent

Page 754

from the plaintiff and will result in irreparable injury to his business unless the defendant is enjoined from such actions.

'10. Plaintiff says that he had no adequate remedy at law.'

After the above recital, plaintiff asked for various forms of injunctive relief. [*] [42 Ohio St.2d 244]

The defendant, in its answer, stated that plaintiff's complaint 'should be dismissed because it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.' Defendant later filed two motions to dismiss. Each was filed subsequent to the answer, and so contravened the Civ.R. 12(B) requirement that: '* * * A motion making any of these defenses...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP