COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA NO. 71831 ROBERT PRATHER, : : Plaintiff-Appellee : JOURNAL ENTRY : and vs. : OPINION : ESTELLA MAYS SMITH, : : Defendant-Appellant : DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT OF DECISION : OCTOBER 30, 1997 CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: : Civil appeal from : Common Pleas Court : Case No. 302191 JUDGMENT : AFFIRMED. DATE OF JOURNALIZATION : APPEARANCES: For plaintiff-appellee: Almeta A. Johnson 13308 Euclid Avenue East Cleveland, Ohio 44112 For defendant-appellant: Alan S. Levine 1200 Illuminating Building 55 Public Square Cleveland, Ohio 44113 2 NAHRA, J.: Appellant, Estella Mays Smith, appeals the bench trial in which appellee, Robert L. Prather, was awarded a verdict of $21,450 in his action for conversion. At trial, appellee presented three witnesses: Estella Smith, Laura Carter, and himself. Appellee testified that he met appellant in the early 1960's, that he rented the third floor of appellant's home in the early 1970's, and that in the early 1980's he entrusted appellant with his financial matters. In April 1983, appellee asked appellant to help him open a savings account because he could not read or write; she agreed, and they opened a joint savings account with $7,000. He stated that he then received $10,000 and placed that money in the account. Appellee also testified that appellant would occasionally cash his paycheck for him, deduct his rent, place some money in the savings account, and give him the balance of the cash. He stated that he also asked appellant to place one or two of his tax refund checks into savings. Appellee testified that in the mid-1980's his girlfriend, Laura Carter, began handling his banking, but that appellant retained the savings passbook. In 1995 appellee asked appellant for his money. He said that appellant said that she owed him $24,000 and agreed to repay him at the rate of $200 per month. Laura Carter testified that she helped appellee with his weekly banking and that in 1995 she kept track of appellee's rent payments and appellant's $200 monthly payments. 3 Contrary to appellee's testimony, appellant testified that the savings account was opened with only $8,000. She testified that she borrowed $3,000 directly from appellee, and denied taking money from the savings account. In the court's judgment entry granting a verdict in favor of appellee, the court stated: Neither party introduced documentary exhibits that entirely resolved the issues between them. *** The plaintiff's testimony and his demeanor impressed the Court as believable and convincing in its sparseness and the plaintiff's clear unwillingness to stretch the truth or strengthen his claim with added or exaggerated detail. The defendant impressed the Court as being coy and evasive at one point and later clearly shaken by counsel's cross-examination in defendant's case on the point about defendant's alleged admission of her having $24,000.00 of plaintiff's money. In addition defendant's credibility suffered when she claimed to have been unaware of plaintiff's recent failures to pay rent but nonetheless recalled opening a bank account at Society bank with a specific sum, $8,000.00, of plaintiff's money in - it was stipulated - April 1983. *** Based upon a thorough consideration of all the evidence and gauging the different credibilities of the witnesses, the Court finds that by the preponderance, that is, the greater weight, of the evidence the plaintiff has established defendant's conversion of his funds to defendant's own use in the amount of $21,450.00. Appellant raises one assignment of error: I. THE JUDGMENT OF THE TRIAL COURT IS AGAINST THE MANIFEST WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE. Appellant argues that the weight of the evidence failed to establish the elements of conversion and that the evidence presented did not support a judgment of $21,450. 4 A judgment supported by some competent, credible evidence will generally not be overturned by a reviewing court and facts as found by the trier-of-fact are presumed to be correct. Seasons Coal Co. v. Cleveland (1984), 10 Ohio St.3d 77, 79-80, 461 N.E.2d 1273, 1276 (citations omitted). Conversion is `any exercise of dominion or control wrongfully exerted over the personal property of another in denial or under a claim inconsistent with his rights.' Central Benefits Mutual Ins. Co. v. RIS Administrators Agency, Inc. (1994), 93 Ohio App.3d 397, 402, 638 N.E.2d 1049, 1053 (quoting Ohio Tel. Equip. & Sales, Inc. v. Hadler Realty Co. (1985), 24 Ohio App.3d 91, 93, 493 N.E.2d 289, 292). In this case, the evidence presented was almost exclusively testimonial; little documentation of appellee's and appellant's monetary transactions was introduced. Accordingly, the trial court was forced to make judgments as to witnesses' credibility to determine: first, whether appellee presented sufficient evidence to establish the tort of conversion and; second, if proven, to determine what damages appellee suffered. Evidence presented by appellee established that: appellant and appellee opened a joint savings account in 1983; that at least $17,000 of appellee's money was placed into the account; that appellee did not withdraw money from the account; that appellant had continuous access to the savings account passbook; and that appellant admitted to appellee that she owed him $24,000. This evidence sufficiently supports the court's verdict for appellee. Accordingly, we will not overturn the judgment of the trial court. 5 Appellant argues that the award of damages in this case was not supported by the evidence, citing Tabar v. Charlie's Towing Service, Inc. (1994), 97 Ohio App.3d 423, 646 N.E.2d 1132, for the proposition that the measure of damages in an action for conversion is the value of the property at the time of the conversion. Appellant argues that the damages awarded by the court are not justified because the evidence was insufficient to determine when any money was converted and hence insufficient to determine the amount owed. That the damages in a conversion action are to be measured at the time of conversion is a correct statement of law; however, this issue is irrelevant to this case because in determining damages, the court relied upon appellee's testimony that appellant admitted that she owed him $24,000. This evidence is sufficient to support the court's award of $21,450 ($24,000 less the $2,550 repaid) even though the exact date of conversion was unknown. Appellant's sole assignment of error is overruled and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. 6 It is ordered that appellee recover of appellant his costs herein taxed. The court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal. It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this court directing the Common Pleas Court to carry this judgment into execution. A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. McMONAGLE, TIMOTHY E., J., CONCURS. MATIA, DAVID T., P.J., NOT PARTICIPATING. JOSEPH J. NAHRA JUDGE N.B. This entry is an announcement of the court's decision. See App.R. 22(B), 22(D) and 26(A); Loc.App.R. 27. This decision will be journalized and will become the judgment and order of the court pursuant to App.R.22(E) unless a motion for reconsideration with supporting brief, per App.R. 26(A), is filed within ten (10) days of the announcement of the court's decision. The time period for review by the Supreme Court of Ohio shall begin to run upon the journalization of this court's announcement of decision by the .