Background
Arline Burks Gant stored personal property with Joseph Bolan Sr. and Judith Bolan, including furniture, art, instruments, household goods, and tools. Gant acknowledged that she had not paid storage fees since November 2023. Beginning in February 2025, she alleged, she repeatedly tried to pay the amount the Bolans said was due and retrieve her belongings, but they changed the payment terms and denied her access to the unit.
Storage Solutions, through counsel, sent lien notices seeking $11,249.40 and invoking Ohio’s Self-Service Storage Facility Act. Gant alleged deficiencies in the notices and claimed that her property, including a piano, appeared missing or displaced. Her amended complaint sought relief based on the parties’ dealings, the lien process, and the alleged loss of her property. The trial court dismissed the complaint under Civ.R. 12(B)(6).
The Court’s Holding
The Eighth District reversed the dismissal of Gant’s conversion, R.C. Chapter 5322, and breach-of-contract claims against Judith Bolan, Joseph Bolan Sr., and Storage Solutions. Applying Ohio’s liberal pleading rules and accepting Gant’s factual allegations as true, the court held that she alleged enough operative facts to give fair notice of those claims.
The court concluded that the attached lien notice did not include an itemized statement of the amount due, a conspicuous auction warning, or an advisement concerning denial of access. Gant also alleged continuing denial of access and repeated thwarted efforts to tender payment. Those allegations could support statutory-liability and conversion theories, as well as a breach claim based on alleged modified payment arrangements. But the court affirmed dismissal of 69th Street Holding Group and 69th Street Property Portfolio because the complaint alleged no conduct by either entity.
Key Takeaways
- A self-storage owner must comply with R.C. 5322.03’s lien-enforcement requirements before disposing of stored property.
- A complaint need not label every legal theory if its factual allegations provide fair notice of a viable claim.
- Allegations that a debtor was ready and able to pay, but was prevented from doing so, may support a contract claim despite nonpayment.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that self-storage lien rights are procedural as well as substantive: default alone does not authorize denial of access or disposition of property without compliance with the statutory process.
It also reinforces that courts must read pro se pleadings with appropriate latitude at the motion-to-dismiss stage, while still dismissing defendants against whom no facts are alleged.