## Facts

- Ford Motor Credit Co. financed multiple vehicle lease and retail installment contracts for James Ryan, Carolyn Ryan, and related business entities.
- The Ryans defaulted on the contracts, and Ford hired Automobile Recovery Services of Cincinnati, Inc. (ARS) to repossess vehicles by self-help under Ohio’s U.C.C. Article 9.
- During a May 9, 2005 repossession of a Mercury Mountaineer Premier, the vehicle allegedly contained personal property; ARS returned only license plates, and the Ryans later redeemed the vehicle.
- On January 12, 2006, an ARS agent attempted to repossess the Premier from the Ryans’ carport; James Ryan testified he told the agent to stop and leave, and that the agent grabbed his hands, pushed him, yelled at him, and towed the vehicle while Ryan felt threatened.
- On February 7–8, 2006, ARS repossessed three additional vehicles without physical confrontation.
- Ford sued for breach of the lease and retail installment contracts; the Ryans asserted counterclaims and third-party claims against Ford, ARS, and a dealership, alleging wrongful repossession/breach of the peace, conversion, trespass, and assault.

## Issues

1. Whether Ford was entitled to summary judgment on its breach-of-contract claims based on undisputed defaults and contract terms.
2. Whether ARS and Ford were entitled to summary judgment on tort claims arising from the self-help repossessions.
3. Whether evidence of a physical and verbal confrontation during the January 12, 2006 repossession created triable issues of breach of the peace, conversion of the vehicle, and assault.

## Decision

- The Ohio Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for Ford on most breach-of-contract claims, finding no genuine dispute that the Ryans defaulted and Ford held enforceable contractual and secured-creditor rights.
- The court affirmed summary judgment against many of the Ryans’ tort theories to the extent they lacked evidentiary support or did not defeat Ford’s contract claims.
- The court reversed summary judgment for ARS (and relatedly for Ford to the extent derivative) on claims tied to the January 12, 2006 repossession, holding a factfinder could conclude the repossession involved a breach of the peace.
- The court held that, given the asserted breach of the peace, the conversion claim for the Premier (as collateral) could proceed.
- The court held James Ryan’s testimony created a genuine issue of material fact on assault, and remanded that claim for further proceedings.
- The case was affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

## Legal Principles

- Under Ohio’s enactment of U.C.C. § 9-609, a secured party may repossess collateral without judicial process only if the repossession is accomplished without breach of the peace.
- Whether a breach of the peace occurred during a self-help repossession is commonly a fact question inappropriate for summary judgment when the record contains evidence of physical force, threats, or escalating confrontation.
- A repossession conducted with a breach of the peace may be treated as wrongful and can support tort liability, including conversion of the collateral.
- Assault requires evidence that the defendant willfully threatened or attempted harmful or offensive contact and that the conduct reasonably placed the plaintiff in fear of such contact; testimony describing grabbing, pushing, and threatening behavior can create a triable issue.
- Summary judgment is proper only where no genuine issue of material fact exists and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law; evidentiary insufficiency on essential elements supports judgment against the nonmovant.

## Conclusion

The court largely upheld Ford’s contract recovery for the Ryans’ payment defaults, but it required trial on whether the January 12, 2006 repossession was carried out through a breach of the peace, because that factual dispute could support conversion of the vehicle and an assault claim against the repossession agent (and potentially related liability).


Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Ryan, 189 Ohio App. 3d 560, 939 N.E.2d 891 (Ohio Ct. App. 2010)