Hirsi v. Davis Creek Auto Sales

• Decision Date: 01 November 2016
• Docket Number: No. 15AP–415.,15AP–415.
• Citation: 63 N.E.3d 1256
• Parties: Asha HIRSI, et al., Plaintiffs–Appellees, v. DAVIS CREEK AUTO SALES, et al., Defendants–Appellants.
• Court: Ohio Court of Appeals

63 N.E.3d 1256

Asha HIRSI, et al., Plaintiffs–Appellees,

v.DAVIS CREEK AUTO SALES, et al., Defendants–Appellants.

No. 15AP–415.

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Tenth District, Franklin County.

Nov. 1, 2016.

On brief: Mark J. Miller, Columbus, for appellees.

On brief: Marcell Rose Anthony, Columbus, for appellants. Argued: Marcell Rose Anthony.

BRUNNER

, J.

{¶ 1} Defendants-appellants, Davis Creek Auto Sales (also identified in the record as Davis Creek Auto Group, and referred to herein as “Davis Creek”) and its owner, Mehrdad Pourfarhadi, appeal a judgment of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas, filed on April 15, 2015, following a jury verdict finding Davis Creek liable for money damages to plaintiffs-appellees, Asha Hirsi and Mohammed Salem, for their breach of contract claims. The jury further found Pourfarhadi not liable for breach of contract, and Hirsi and Salem not liable for Davis Creek and Pourfarhadi's counterclaims. Davis Creek and Pourfarhadi seek to have the jury verdict in favor of Hirsi and Salem reversed and judgment entered in favor of Davis Creek. Because we find that the trial court improperly excluded certain evidence proffered by Davis Creek and Pourfarhadi, we remand for a new trial.

I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

{¶ 2} The record indicates that the parties had known each other for many years prior to the events that gave rise to this case, which began as an action for money damages by Hirsi and Salem against Davis Creek and Pourfarhadi for breach of an oral contract (“the contract”) for the sale of Hirsi's 2005 Mercedes Benz (“the car”). Pourfarhadi is a car dealer from West Virginia, where his business, Davis Creek, is located. Davis Creek and Pourfarhadi participate in auto auctions conducted by Manheim Ohio in Grove City, Ohio. In March 2011, Salem was engaged in the wholesale car sale business in the Columbus area and had represented Davis Creek and Pourfarhadi at auto auctions in Ohio, including Manheim Ohio. The record indicates that, in exchange for Salem's services on behalf of Davis Creek and himself, Pourfarhadi allowed Salem to sell vehicles in his own right at Manheim Ohio under Davis Creek's permit. Hirsi was Salem's friend and, through him, Hirsi had made contact with Pourfarhadi.

{¶ 3} The record before this Court also contains apparent inconsistencies and contradictions regarding when, where, and from whom Hirsi purchased the car, how long she had it before it was sold at auction under Davis Creek's permit, whether the parties entered into an oral contract regarding the sale of the car, who delivered the car to the auction for sale, whether Pourfarhadi paid the sale proceeds to Salem, and whether Salem and Hirsi's conduct damaged the business interests of Davis Creek and Pourfarhadi.

{¶ 4} Hirsi and Salem allege that on March 1, 2011, Hirsi had purchased the car from Alex Auto Sales in Columbus, Ohio for $15,500¹ with Salem's assistance. Salem accompanied her to Alex Auto Sales, where he paid for the car using money she provided. They allege that an employee of Alex Auto Sales gave Salem a bill of sale and a signed certificate of title, which Salem handed over to Hirsi. Hirsi placed the title in the car's glove compartment and “forgot about it,” never signing it or registering the car in her name with the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles (“BMV”). (Mar. 9, 2015 Tr. Vol. I at 72.) Hirsi stated she had not paid, nor been charged for, sales tax or transfer fees when she bought the car because Alex Auto Sales just gave her the title without executing a transfer of title of the vehicle specifically to her. Hirsi stated she did not sign the title because she would have had to pay taxes on the purchase.

{¶ 5} Hirsi and Salem testified further that Hirsi began having problems with the car almost immediately and wanted to get rid of it. Salem contacted Pourfarhadi, who met with them at Salem's house on March 4, 2011. They allege that Pourfarhadi agreed to take Hirsi's car to auction, sell it for her under Davis Creek's permit, pay the auction fees out of the sale proceeds and give the remaining amount to Hirsi and Salem. They further allege that Pourfarhadi left Salem's house with the car on March 4, 2011 and sold it at auction later that month, but did not give Hirsi the sale proceeds. Hirsi stated she received a letter from Pourfarhadi that stated he was not “going to pay [her] back.” (Tr. Vol. I at 60.)

{¶ 6} Hirsi filed a report with the Grove City Division of Police (“GCPD”) in August 2011, indicating that Pourfarhadi had stolen her car on March 30, 2011. GCPD investigated the report and on October 20, 2011, advised Hirsi that the case was a civil matter, in part because Hirsi was unable to show that the car had been registered in her name. GCPD cleared Hirsi's theft report without charging anyone.

{¶ 7} On April 11, 2013, Hirsi and Salem filed suit against Davis Creek and Pourfarhadi in the Franklin County Municipal Court for breach of contract, seeking damages in the amount of $14,700, which they claim represents the proceeds of the sale after the auction fees were paid.

{¶ 8} On May 13, 2013, Davis Creek and Pourfarhadi filed an answer denying all allegations set forth in the complaint and asserting that neither Hirsi nor Salem was the lawful owner of the car and thus had no right to sell it, rendering the alleged contract invalid. Davis Creek and Pourfarhadi also filed counterclaims “sounding in contract, principal-agency, fraud, conversion, civil theft, tortious interference in business, forgery, [and] claims for frivolous lawsuits” against Hirsi and Salem. (May 13, 2013 Answer and Countercl. at 2.) Davis Creek and Pourfarhadi allege that they were barred from the auction for one month as a result of the sale of Hirsi's car under Davis Creek's permit. Davis Creek and Pourfarhadi also allege that Hirsi and Salem filed a false police report by claiming that the car that sold at the auction was titled in their names, when it was not. Davis Creek and Pourfarhadi claim to have lost $150,000 in business as a direct and proximate cause of Hirsi's and Salem's actions. They also claim entitlement to punitive damages in excess of $250,000.

{¶ 9} On June 7, 2013, Hirsi and Salem filed an answer denying the allegations set forth in the counterclaims.

{¶ 10} By judgment entry filed June 10, 2013, the Franklin County Municipal Court transferred the case to the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas because the amount of damages counterclaimed exceeded the municipal court's jurisdiction.

{¶ 11} On July 7, 2014, Hirsi and Salem moved for summary judgment on Davis Creek and Pourfarhadi's counterclaims.

{¶ 12} Also on July 7, 2014, Davis Creek and Pourfarhadi filed a motion for partial summary judgment as to Hirsi and Salem's breach of contract claim, reiterating their argument that Hirsi and Salem never held title to the car and thus were not the lawful owners and, consequently, there could not be a valid contract to sell the car. Davis Creek and Pourfarhadi also sought summary judgment on their counterclaim of civil theft against Hirsi and Salem.

{¶ 13} On July 21, 2014, Davis Creek and Pourfarhadi dismissed their counterclaims for contract, principal-agency, and frivolous lawsuits.

{¶ 14} By judgment entry filed September 29, 2014, the trial court ruled on the parties' summary judgment motions. It granted Hirsi and Salem's motion for summary judgment on the civil theft counterclaim, finding that it was barred by the statute of limitations, but denied summary judgment as to the remaining counterclaims for fraud, conversion, tortious interference with business relations, and forgery.

{¶ 15} The trial court simultaneously denied Davis Creek and Pourfarhadi's motion for summary judgment on Hirsi and Salem's breach of contract claim, finding that it could not “discern whether the parties ever had an agreement to sell the car. Whether an agreement existed is a genuine issue of material fact. And, without an agreement, title issues are moot.” (Sept. 29, 2014 Entry at 6.)

{¶ 16} The remaining claims proceeded to trial, with jury selection occurring on March 9, 2015. At the time of jury selection, Hirsi and Salem's trial counsel filed a motion requesting that Davis Creek and Pourfarhadi's claims for compensatory damages be bifurcated from their claim for punitive damages pursuant to R.C. 2315.21

. The trial court granted the motion over the objections of opposing counsel, and the case was tried in a bifurcated jury trial March 9 through 12, 2015.

{¶ 17} At trial, Hirsi testified she had bought the car from Alex Auto Sales on March 1, 2011. She testified further that she met with Pourfarhadi three days later, on March 4, 2011, at which time he agreed to sell the car and give her the money. She stated that she had forgotten about the title, and Pourfarhadi did not ask her for it. She acknowledged that she never signed it and never registered the car in her name.

{¶ 18} Salem testified that he had known Pourfarhadi approximately 20 years and had worked for him about 8 years. He stated that, through Pourfarhadi, he had purchased over 400 cars from different auctions. Salem described the work he performed for Pourfarhadi, which included depositing checks into Davis Creek's bank account, signing bills of sales for customers, signing titles, and flipping titles.

{¶ 19} With respect to Hirsi's car, Salem initially testified that he was with Hirsi when she obtained the car from Alex Auto Sales on March 1, 2011. Salem further testified that he filled out the bill of sale with the information provided by Hirsi, and then gave it to an employee of Alex Auto Sales to complete and sign. The Alex Auto Sales employee signed the title on the reverse side and returned it to Salem, who gave it to Hirsi. However, Salem later acknowledged that he converted the cash provided by Hirsi into a cashier's check made payable to Ohio Auto Auction to pay for the car on October 21, 2010.

{¶ 20} According to Salem, he contacted Pourfarhadi in early ...