Cirotto v. Am. Self Storage of Pickerington

Citations

• 2025 Ohio 1670

Syllabus

April 17, 2024 judgment affirmed; March 9, 2023 judgment affirmed in part and reversed in part. In his amended complaint, plaintiff alleged facts demonstrating the defendant/storage company engaged in extreme and outrageous conduct by disposing of his property two days after a court issued a temporary restraining order preventing the storage company from disposing of the property. Because plaintiff also pled sufficient facts to support the remaining elements of his intentional infliction of emotional distress (\IIED\) claim, the trial court erred by granting the defendants' Civ.R. 12(B)(6) motion and dismissing plaintiff's IIED claim against the storage company. The trial court did not err by granting the defendants' Civ.R. 12(B)(6) motion and dismissing plaintiff's claims for fraud, extortion, and injunctive relief in their entirety and plaintiff's claims for breach of contract, promissory estoppel, and IIED against the seven, non-storage company defendants. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by granting the storage company's motion for a protective order limiting discovery to the issue of damages. The trial court did not err by adopting in part and rejecting in part the magistrate's decision awarding plaintiff damages.