Mitchell v. Atha, Dir. of Pub. Utilities

Citations

• 2025 Ohio 3247

Syllabus

The trial court did not err in sustaining the defendant's Civ.R. 12(B)(6) motion to dismiss and dismissing complaint, where complaint did not allege that plaintiff had presented payment of his outstanding electric debt to the defendants, that the defendants rejected that payment, or that he suffered any damage because of that supposed rejection, but instead asserted that an altered bill wrongly claimed to be a negotiable instrument should have been accepted as payment. The trial court correctly held that the plaintiff was wholly unable prove the elements of wrongful rejection of tender, breach of contract, or breach of fiduciary duty. Judgment affirmed.