Update: On June 30, 2021 the First District Court of Appeals found for Danopulos on the appeal and cross-appeal in the case.  Read about that here.

On August 13, 2019, by a vote of 5-2, the Supreme Court of Ohio dismissed Danopulos v. Am. Trading II, L.L.C., 2019-Ohio-3204 as improvidently accepted. Chief Justice O’Connor, Justices Fischer, Donnelly, Stewart, and Judge Hensal, subbing for Justice DeWine, voted to dismiss.  Justices Kennedy and French dissented. The issue in the case was whether a pawnbroker’s compliance with R.C. 4727.09 and R.C. 4727.12 in the purchase and resale of property provides it with lawful possession of the property in defense to a plaintiff’s conversion claim.  The case was argued July 9, 2019. Read more about that the argument here.

This decision means that the opinion of the First District Court of Appeals in the case stands. The First District found that Danopulos proved her conversion action, and held that the case must go back to the trial court to enter judgment in her favor on liability on the conversion claim and to determine her damages.

As part of its brief decision, the Supreme Court of Ohio also wrote this:

“The court orders that the opinion of the court of appeals may not be cited as authority except by the parties inter se.”

This means that the holding here only applies to these parties, and the court of appeals decision shouldn’t be cited as precedent in other cases.

The blog will follow what happens to the damages part of the case on remand.