Appeals panel agrees that failure to read document doesn't null contract

KEITH ARNOLD, Daily Reporter Staff Writer
A Franklin County appellate panel was unable to conclude that the Franklin County Municipal Court's determination in a breach of contract suit between a specialty home-cleaning service and the next of kin of a Grove City man who died in his home was against the manifest weight of the evidence in a recent decision.

"Upon our review of the record, we find no error in the trial court's determination that an enforceable contract existed between the parties," 10th District Court of Appeals Judge Patrick McGrath wrote for the 3-0 court.

The appellate court's holding overruled Nancy Buffington's claim that the trial court was mistaken to find that the contract between her and the cleaning service was enforceable and, therefore, obligated the woman to utilize the company's services per the agreed terms.

Buffington's father died in his home on Nov. 10, 2005, case summary provided. The man's body was discovered one-and-a-half to two days after his death. Approximately one week later, the personal belongings were removed from the home and it was listed for sale.

On Jan. 14, 2006, Buffington contracted for the services of Aftermath Inc., which provides biological remediation and cleanup services. According to the contract, the woman agreed to pay for cleanup services concerning an unattended death in the Grove City home.

Aftermath's complaint alleged that after the firm rendered services, appellant refused to pay the amount due under the contract. After a trial to the bench, the trial court concluded that a valid written contract existed between the parties and that the company was entitled to payment for the services rendered in accordance with the contract. The court awarded damages in the amount of $6,189.36 to Aftermath.

The panel noted Buffington signed both a site cleanup agreement and a fee agreement for non-insurance-related jobs. Additionally, the court rejected the woman's claim there existed no evidence that she understood or agreed to biological remediation of her father's home.

"... As noted by the trial court, appellant's stated failure to read the documents prior to signing them is of no consequence as it is well-established that the failure to read the terms of a contract is not a valid defense to enforcement of the contract," as in Haller v. Borror Corp. (1990), 50 Ohio St.3d 10, 14.

"Further, appellant's argument that she was 'mistaken' equally fails because 'relief for a unilateral mistake of material fact will not be provided where such mistake is the result of the negligence of the party seeking relief,'" as in Hikmet v. Turkoglu, 10th Dist. No. 08AP-1021, 2009-Ohio-6477, and Marshall v. Beach (2001), 143 Ohio App.3d 432, 437.

Fellow 10th District Judge Susan Brown and John Connor joined McGrath to form the majority.

The case is cited as Aftermath Inc. v. Buffington, 2010-Ohio-19.