Meek v. Collins

[Cite as Meek v. Collins, 2026-Ohio-1530.]




             IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO
                             SEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
                                COLUMBIANA COUNTY

                                        WILLIAM R. MEEK,

                                             Plaintiff-Appellee,

                                                     v.

                                             GINO COLLINS,

                                       Defendant-Appellant.


                        OPINION AND JUDGMENT ENTRY
                                         Case No. 25 CO 0034


                                 Civil Appeal from the
               Columbiana County Municipal Court, Columbiana County, Ohio
                               Case No. 2025 CVI 1948

                                          BEFORE:
                   Mark A. Hanni, Cheryl L. Waite, Carol Ann Robb, Judges.


                                                JUDGMENT:
                                                  Affirmed.


William R. Meek, Pro se, Plaintiff-Appellee (No brief filed) and

Gino Collins, Pro se, Defendant-Appellant.

                                         Dated: April 28, 2026
                                                                                      –2–



HANNI, J.

       {¶1}   Defendant-Appellant, Gino Collins, appeals from a Columbiana County
Municipal Court judgment awarding judgment in favor of Plaintiff-Appellee, William R.
Meek, in the amount of $4,160 on a complaint filed by Appellee for reimbursement of a
down payment Appellee paid to Appellant for the installation of a fence, which was not
completed. Appellant asserts the trial court’s judgment was not supported by the weight
of the evidence. Because Appellant has failed to provide this Court with a transcript of
the proceedings or a suitable transcript substitute, we have no way to review Appellant’s
claim. Therefore, the trial court’s judgment is affirmed.
       {¶2}   On July 3, 2025, Appellee filed a pro se complaint in the Columbiana County
Municipal Court. The complaint alleged Appellee paid Appellant $4,200 as a down
payment for the installation of a fence. It asserted the fence was partially installed and
then “all fence panels [were] taken back by [Appellant] and returned to Lowes.” The
complaint sought $4,200 plus interest. The court set the matter for a small claims hearing.
       {¶3}   The court held a hearing on the complaint. The parties appeared pro se.
The court heard testimony and admitted exhibits from both parties. The court then
entered judgment on September 22, 2025. It stated that “[b]ased upon the testimony
provided and evidence submitted” it was awarding judgment in favor of Appellee in the
amount of $4,160.
       {¶4}   Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal. He now raises a single assignment
of error for our review.
       {¶5}   Appellant’s sole assignment of error states:

       THE TRIAL COURT ERRED BY ENTERING A MONEY JUDGMENT
       AGAINST DEFENDANT-APPELLANT WHERE THE AMOUNT OF
       DAMAGES AWARDED WAS NOT SUPPORTED BY COMPETENT,
       CREDIBLE EVIDENCE AND WAS AGAINST THE MANIFEST WEIGHT
       OF THE EVIDENCE.

       {¶6}   Appellant argues that Appellee failed to establish the amount of damages
with reasonable certainty. He claims Appellee did not present reliable documentation



Case No. 25 CO 0034
                                                                                           –3–


clearly demonstrating the scope of the fence installation services performed, that the
services were completed, or how the total dollar amount was calculated. Appellant
asserts Appellee should have introduced an itemized invoice, proof of agreed-upon
pricings, or documentation of labor and material costs. Because he claims the evidence
was lacking in these respects, Appellant argues the trial court’s judgment was against the
manifest weight of the evidence and its judgment was not supported by sufficient
evidence.
       {¶7}   “Pro se civil litigants are bound by the same rules and procedures as those
litigants who retain counsel. They are not to be accorded greater rights and must accept
the results of their own mistakes and errors.” Meyers v. First Nat. Bank of Cincinnati, 3
Ohio App.3d 209, 210 (1st Dist. 1981) citing Dawson v. Pauline Homes, Inc., 107 Ohio
App. 90 (10th Dist. 1958) see also Pinnacle Credit Servs., LLC v. Kuzniak, 2009-Ohio-
1021, ¶ 30 (7th Dist.) citing State ex rel. Fuller v. Mengel, 2003-Ohio-6448.
       {¶8}   Appellant failed to file a transcript of the hearing or an appropriate transcript
substitute. The appellant bears the burden of demonstrating error by reference to the
record of the proceedings below, and it is the appellant's duty to provide the reviewing
court with an adequate transcript. App.R. 9(B); Burrell v. Kassicieh, 128 Ohio App.3d
226, 232 (1st Dist. 1998), citing Knapp v. Edwards Laboratories, 61 Ohio St.2d 197, 199
(1980). If no transcript is available, then it is the appellant's duty to present this court with
one of the transcript substitutes as provided for in App.R. 9(C). App.R. 9(B). Since
Appellant failed to file a transcript or transcript substitute, we are left to consider this
appeal based solely on the information in the record.
       {¶9}   Appellant alleges the judgment is not supported by the weight of the
evidence.
       {¶10} When reviewing civil appeals from bench trials, an appellate court applies a
manifest weight standard of review. Revilo Tyluka, L.L.C. v. Simon Roofing & Sheet Metal
Corp., 2011-Ohio-1922, ¶ 5 (8th Dist.), citing App.R. 12(C), Seasons Coal v. Cleveland,
10 Ohio St.3d 77 (1984).
       {¶11} Judgments supported by some competent, credible evidence going to all
the material elements of the case must not be reversed as being against the manifest
weight of the evidence. C.E. Morris Co. v. Foley Constr. Co., 54 Ohio St.2d 279 (1978),



Case No. 25 CO 0034
                                                                                         –4–


syllabus. See also, Gerijo, Inc. v. Fairfield, 70 Ohio St.3d 223, 226 (1994). Reviewing
courts must oblige every reasonable presumption in favor of the lower court's judgment
and findings of fact. Gerijo, 70 Ohio St.3d at 226 (citing Seasons Coal Co., 10 Ohio St.3d
77). In the event the evidence is susceptible to more than one interpretation, we must
construe it consistently with the lower court's judgment. Id.
       {¶12} Given that Appellant has not provided this Court with a transcript of the
hearing or a suitable transcript substitute, we are left with nothing to review other than the
trial court’s judgment entry. That entry simply states that the court heard testimony from,
and admitted exhibits offered by, both pro se parties. The court then concluded, based
on the evidence, that Appellee was entitled to a judgment of $4,160.
       {¶13} Without more to go on, this Court cannot evaluate the evidence. Given the
lack of transcript or transcript substitute, we have no choice but to presume the trial court
acted properly in awarding judgment in favor of Appellee.
       {¶14} Accordingly, Appellant’s sole assignment of error is without merit and is
overruled.
       {¶15} For the reasons stated above, the trial court’s judgment is hereby affirmed.

Waite, P.J., concurs.

Robb, J., concurs.




Case No. 25 CO 0034
[Cite as Meek v. Collins, 2026-Ohio-1530.]




        For the reasons stated in the Opinion rendered herein, the assignment of error is
overruled and it is the final judgment and order of this Court that the judgment of the
Columbiana County Municipal Court, Columbiana County, Ohio, is affirmed. Costs to be
taxed against the Appellant.
        A certified copy of this opinion and judgment entry shall constitute the mandate in
this case pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. It is ordered that a
certified copy be sent by the clerk to the trial court to carry this judgment into execution.




                                        NOTICE TO COUNSEL

        This document constitutes a final judgment entry.