After a petitioner's second failure to attend court-ordered mediation, an Ohio appellate court affirmed a trial court's judgment dismissing the petitioner's claims with prejudice where notice had been given that such a result would occur in the event of a second absence.

In Williams v. RPA Development Corp., No. 07AP-881, 2008 WL 2308822 (Ohio Ct. App. June 5, 2008), Denise Williams alleged claims of fraud, unjust enrichment, and intentional infliction of emotional distress against RPA in connection with a real estate transaction. The trial court ordered mediation of the dispute before a magistrate.

Williams failed to attend the scheduled mediation session. She was given an opportunity to explain to the magistrate why she had been absent and the mediation was rescheduled. After Williams failed to attend the rescheduled mediation, the magistrate recommended that her claims be dismissed with prejudice.

The trial court adopted the magistrate's recommendation. Williams appealed to this Court, asserting that the trial court erred in its dismissal.

This Court agreed with the trial court. First, Williams was cautioned by the order rescheduling the mediation that no leeway would be granted if she missed the subsequent hearing and she was given the opportunity to request a continuance. Although Williams claimed that she did not know of the second mediation, the order indicated that she was informed "orally and in writing" about the second mediation.

Thus, Williams failed to provide an excuse for her absence, the Court found. The opinion also suggested that any opportunity given to explain her absence before dismissal of the case would not have yielded a justifiable excuse.

Second, for the same reasons cited above, the Court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Williams' claim with prejudice. See Pembaur v. Leis, 1 Ohio St.3d 89, 90 (1982). It therefore affirmed the trial court's judgment dismissing Williams' case with prejudice.