Your case is unique, but you are not alone.

About 41,000 new cases are filed in U.S. courts every weekday. Behind each one is a person trying to understand what happens next. Here’s what the public record can tell you about this matter — and about the people deciding it.

  • Know your judge

    Every judge has a pattern — what they grant, what they deny, how they handle the kinds of motions your case will see.

  • Know your attorney

    See an attorney’s actual track record — case types, courts, and how they’ve performed in front of this judge before.

  • Know your court

    Every courthouse has its own rhythm — filing-to-resolution times, common dispositions, how often cases like yours settle.

Is this judge more likely to rule for the plaintiff or the defendant in cases of this type?

How has your attorney actually performed in front of this judge?

AICasePredict surfaces patterns from public court records. We don’t predict outcomes and we don’t recommend changing your attorney — that’s a conversation for you and them. We just show you what the record already says.

Full Analytics Report

  • Complete case narrative
  • Judge details and rulings
  • Case disposition and outcome
  • All docket entries
  • Related cases and filings
$20
One-time purchase
Photo of Cuyahoga County

Court

Cuyahoga County

Ohio

View Court Profile

Case Information

Filed 2023-03-14
Status INACTIVE
Type Commercial Docket
Docket 106 entries

Parties

Plaintiff Kamms Plaza Shopping Center, Llc
Defendant Richard Staskevicius|Vanessa Staskus|Matti Lavikka|Nida Enterprises, Inc D.b.a. Electric Beach Tanning|Rita Zvirblis
Photo of Hon. MICHAEL J RUSSO

Judge

Hon. MICHAEL J RUSSO

Cuyahoga County (OH)

Ohio

View Judge Profile

Lawyers

Docket Entries

  1. ASE FILED: COMPLAINT
  2. OURT COST ASSESSED KAMMS PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER, LLC BILL AMOUNT 411.44 PAID AMOUNT 400 AMOUNT DUE 11.44
  3. HE 8TH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS ENTERED ITS DECISION ON THE APPEAL OF THIS CASE ON 05/30/2024, NO ACTION INCONSISTENT WITH APPELLATE COURT JURISDICTION IS TO BE TAKEN IN THIS MATTER UNTIL THE TIME FOR FILING AN APPEAL TO THE OHIO SUPREME COURT HAS EXPIRED UNDER S.CTR. PRAC. R. 7.01. THIS ENTRY SPECIFICALLY DOES NOT PRECLUDE EXECUTION ON A JUDGMENT WHERE NO STAY OF EXECUTION PENDING APPEAL IS IN EFFECT. IF APPROPRIATE, SUBSEQUENT TO THE APPELLATE PERIOD EXPIRING, THE CASE MAY BE RETURNED AS NECESSARY FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS TO THE DOCKET OF THE ORIGINATING COURT BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE. UNLESS AS OTHERWISE AGREED UPON IN WRITING BY THE PARTIES, THE EARLIEST POSSIBLE DATE OF RE-INSTATEMENT IS 07/15/2024. THIS ENTRY TAKEN BY JUDGE BRENDAN J SHEEHAN. NOTICE ISSUED
  4. ffirmed. >Michael John Ryan, J., and Frank Daniel Celebrezze, III, J., concur; Lisa B. Fobes, P.J., concurs in judgment only. Notice issued.
  5. PPELLANT'S 9113046 RECORD TRANSMITTED TO THE COURT OF APPEALS CONSISTING OF THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE DOCKET, JOURNAL ENTRIES AND THE ORIGINAL PAPERS ON CA NO. 113046.
  6. EGULAR MAIL SERVICE RECEIPT NO. 51270359 RETURNED 08/15/2023 FAILURE OF SERVICE ON DEFENDANT NIDA ENTERPRISES, INC ATTEMPTED NOT KNOWN NOTICE MAILED TO PLTFS ATTORNEY. $0.00
  7. PPEAL, PRCPE, & DCKTNG STMNT(51277951) SENT BY REGULAR MAIL SERVICE. TO: DAVID M GAREAU 23823 LORAIN RD. SUITE 200 NORTH OLMSTED, OH 44070-0000
  8. PPEAL, PRCPE, & DCKTNG STMNT(51277950) SENT BY REGULAR MAIL SERVICE. TO: RICHARD STASKEVICIUS 2064 ARTHUR AVENUE LAKEWOOD, OH 44107
  9. UDGMENT ENTRY(51270360) SENT BY REGULAR MAIL SERVICE. TO: RITA ZVIRBLIS 1470 ORCHARD GROVE AVE LAKEWOOD, OH 44107-0000
  10. UDGMENT ENTRY(51270359) SENT BY REGULAR MAIL SERVICE. TO: NIDA ENTERPRISES, INC C/O RITA ZVIRBLIS 17480 LORAIN AVE., UNIT E CLEVELAND, OH 44111
  11. ------------------- NOTICE OF APPEAL -------------------- CA NO. 113046 NOTICE OF APPEAL FILED BY THE PLTF. APPELLANT W/A 9A PRAECIPE AND DOCKETING STATEMENT ON THE REGULAR CALENDAR.
  12. OTICE OF APPEAL FILED PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT'S NOTICE OF APPEAL
  13. UDGMENT ENTRY(51270358) SENT BY EMAIL. TO: DAVID M GAREAU [email protected]
  14. UDGMENT ENTRY(51270357) SENT BY EMAIL. TO: DAVID M GAREAU [email protected]
  15. UDGMENT ENTRY(51270356) SENT BY EMAIL. TO: BRYAN S. MOLLOHAN [email protected]
  16. UDGMENT ENTRY(51270355) SENT BY EMAIL. TO: THOMAS M HORWITZ [email protected]
  17. UDGMENT ENTRY(51270353) SENT BY EMAIL. TO: MARK D MCGRAW [email protected]
  18. PON NOTICE BY THE PLAINTIFF, EFFECTIVE 08/01/2023, ALL REMAINING CLAIMS ARE DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE PURSUANT TO CIV. R. 41(A). FINAL. COURT COST ASSESSED TO THE PLAINTIFF(S). PURSUANT TO CIV.R. 58(B), THE CLERK OF COURTS IS DIRECTED TO SERVE THIS JUDGMENT IN A MANNER PRESCRIBED BY CIV.R. 5(B). THE CLERK MUST INDICATE ON THE DOCKET THE NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF ALL PARTIES, THE METHOD OF SERVICE, AND THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS SERVICE. THIS ENTRY TAKEN BY JUDGE TIMOTHY J MCGINTY. NOTICE ISSUED
  19. OTICE FILED BY P1 KAMMS PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER, LLC ATTORNEY THOMAS M HORWITZ 0062323 PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE OF REMAINING DEFENDANTS
  20. ERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT NO. 50383896 RETURNED 05/13/2023 FAILURE OF SERVICE ON DEFENDANT ZVIRBLIS/RITA/ - NOT DELIVRBL AS ADDR NOTICE MAILED TO PLAINTIFF(S) ATTORNEY
  21. OTION TO DISMISS OF DEFENDANT VANESSA STASKUS 08/13/2023 - UNKNOWN
  22. NSWER OF ANSWER OF OF DEFENDANT VANESSA STASKUS. PRO SE (9999999)
  23. ERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT NO. 50728865 RETURNED 07/18/2023 FAILURE OF SERVICE ON DEFENDANT NIDA ENTERPRISES, INC - ATTEMPTED NOT KNOWN NOTICE MAILED TO PLAINTIFF(S) ATTORNEY
  24. ERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT NO. 50728865 RETURNED 7/18/2023 FAILURE OF SERVICE ON DEFENDANT NIDA ENTERPRISES, INC - UNCLAIMED NOTICE MAILED TO PLAINTIFF(S) ATTORNEY
  25. MOTION TO DISMISS OF DEFENDANT RICHARD STASKEVICIUS, FILED 06/15/2023, IS GRANTED. DEFENDANT STASKEVICIUS WAS ONE OF SEVERAL ORIGINAL SIGNATORIES TO A COMMERCIAL LEASE AGREEMENT WITH PLAINTIFF KAMMS PLAZA FROM NOVEMBER 1993. AT THE SAME TIME AS THE ORIGINAL LEASE, STASKEVICIUS EXECUTIED A PERSONAL GUARANTY FOR THE LEASE THAT IS "LIMITED TO A MAXIUM OF THIRTY-THREE THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS ($33,150.00) FOR THE LEASE DATED NOVEMBER 8, 1993." STASKEVICIUS SIGNED A "FIRST AMENDMENT OF LEASE AGREEMENT" IN 1994, WHICH EXTENDED THE LENGTH OF THE LEASE AND CHANGED THE NAME OF THE TENANT WITH WHICH STASKEVICIUS WAS AFFILIATED. SEVERAL MORE AMENDMENT AND MODIFICATION OF LEASE AGREEMENTS WERE EXECUTED OVER THE YEARS, BUT STASKEVICIUS WAS NOT A SIGNATORY TO THOSE AGREEMENTS. KAMMS ALLEGES NOW THAT THE TENANT HAS FAILED TO PERFORM THROUGH NON-PAYMENT OF RENT AND PURPORTEDLY FILED CLAIMS AGAINST STASKEVICIUS FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT, BREACH OF GUARANTEE, UNJUST ENRICHMENT, AND PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL. DEFENDANT SEEKS TO DISMISS THE CLAIMS AGAINST HIM. A CONTRACT CANNOT BE UNILATERALLY MODIFIED. IN ORDER TO MODIFY A CONTRACT, THE PARTIES TO THAT CONTRACT MUST MUTUALLY CONSENT TO THE MODIFICATION. NAGLE HEATING & AIR CONDITIONING CO. V. HESKETT, 66 OHIO APP.3D 547, 550, 585 N.E.2D 866 (4TH DIST.1990) SEE, GENERALLY, SANDUSKY CTY. PARK DIST. BD. OF COMMRS. V. ANNADALE SCRAP CO. (1978), 60 OHIO APP.2D 415, 14 O.O.3D 430, 398 N.E.2D 810. BECAUSE LAVIKKA NEVER CONSENTED TO ANY MODIFICATIONS TO THE CONTRACT AFTER 1996, HE CANNOT BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR THOSE MODIFICATIONS. KAMMS DOES NOT ALLEGE THAT ANY OF THE UNPAID RENT IS FROM A TIME PERIOD PRIOR TO THE 1996 AMENDMENT AND MODIFICATION OF THE LEASE (WHICH WAS THE FIRST AMENDMENT NOT SIGNED BY STASKEVICIUS). INDEED, IF THE BREACH KAMMS SEEKS TO ATTRIBUTE TO STASKEVICIUS DID OCCUR BEFORE 1996, SUCH BREACH WOULD NO LONGER BE ENFORCEABLE EITHER DUE TO THE ASSENT OF THE BREACH BY KAMMS OR BECAUSE IT CAN NO LONGER BE ENFORCED DUE TO THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS. ALL CLAIMS AGAINST DEFENDANT STASKEVICIUS ARE DISMISSED. PARTIAL. THIS ENTRY TAKEN BY JUDGE TIMOTHY J MCGINTY. NOTICE ISSUED
  26. RETRIAL CONFERENCE SET FOR 08/02/2023 AT 11:30 AM. PHONE PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE TO BE HELD IN LIEU OF CMC. ALL PARTIES ARE TO JOIN ONE LINE AND THEN CALL THE STAFF ATTORNEY AT 216.443.8591 AT THE TIME OF THE PRE-TRIAL OR PROVIDE A CONFERENCE NUMBER TO THE STAFF ATTORNEY IN ADVANCE. IF THE CALL IS UNANSWERED, THE PARTIES SHOULD CONTINUE TO CALL UNTIL THE COURT IS ABLE TO ANSWER. IF THE PARTIES DO NOT CALL AS DIRECTED, THE COURT WILL CONSIDER IT A NON-APPEARANCE AND THE CASE MAY BE DISMISSED OR SET FOR EX PARTE TRIAL. LITIGANTS WHO PLAN TO REPRESENT THEMSELVES OR HAVE NOT YET HIRED AN ATTORNEY MAY CONTACT THE STAFF ATTORNEY AT ANY TIME TO INQUIRE ABOUT THE COURT PROCESS AND TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS TO APPEAR. THE STAFF ATTORNEY CAN BE CONTACTED AT [email protected] OR 216.443.8591. DEFENDANTS IN DEBT COLLECTION CASES MAY CONTACT THE COURT RESOURCE CENTER AT 216.443.8204 OR [email protected] FOR ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE. DEFENDANTS MAY ALSO WISH TO CONTACT THE CLEVELAND LEGAL AID SOCIETY (HTTPS://LASCLEV.ORG/CONTACT/) OR SCRANTON ROAD LEGAL CLINIC (HTTPS://SCRANTONROADMINISTRIES.ORG/LEGAL) FOR LEGAL ADVICE. LITIGANTS NEED NOT PARTICIPATE IF THEY ARE REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL, BUT MAY PARTICIPATE AT ANY COURT DATE. FAILURE OF PRO SE PLTF OR PLTF'S COUNSEL TO PARTICIPATE OR APPEAR AT THIS OR ANY COURT DATE OR TO FOLLOW ANY COURT ORDER WILL RESULT IN ACTION BEING DISMISSED. FAILURE OF PRO SE DEFT OR DEFT'S COUNSEL TO PARTICIPATE OR APPEAR AT THIS OR ANY COURT DATE OR TO FOLLOW ANY COURT ORDER WILL RESULT IN COURT HOLDING EX PARTE TRIAL OR WILL RESULT IN ENTRY OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT. JUDGE MICHAEL J. RUSSO'S STANDING ORDERS AND LITIGATION PREFERENCES ARE AVAILABLE ON HIS PROFILE ON THE COURT'S WEBSITE. THE PARTIES ARE EXPECTED TO HAVE COMPLIED WITH THE PRE-TRIAL DISCLOSURES REQUIRED BY CIV. R. 26 PRIOR TO THE FIRST PRE-TRIAL. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH CIV.R 26 WILL RESULT IN THE COURT SETTING A DISCOVERY HEARING WITH THE POSSIBILITY OF DISMISSAL OR DEFAULT JUDGMENT FOR FAILING TO COMPLY. THE PARTIES MAY REQUEST ORAL ARGUMENT OR FORMAL HEARING ON ANY MATTER BY CONTACTING THE STAFF ATTORNEY. ANY COURT DATE MAY BE HELD IN PERSON, BUT THE PARTIES MUST MAKE ARRANGEMENTS IN ADVANCE BY CONTACTING THE STAFF ATTORNEY. THIS ENTRY TAKEN BY JUDGE TIMOTHY J MCGINTY. NOTICE ISSUED
  27. DEFENDANT MATTI LAVIKKA'S MOTION TO DISMISS AMENDED COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO CIV. R. 12(B)(6), FILED 05/18/2023, IS GRANTED. DEFENDANT LAVIKKA WAS ONE OF SEVERAL ORIGINAL SIGNATORIES TO A COMMERCIAL LEASE AGREEMENT WITH PLAINTIFF KAMMS PLAZA FROM NOVEMBER1993. AT THE SAME TIME AS THE ORIGINAL LEASE, LAVIKKA EXECUTIED A PERSONAL GUARANTY FOR THE LEASE THAT IS "LIMITED TO A MAXIUM OF THIRTY-THREE THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED FIFTY DOLLARS ($33,150.00) FOR THE LEASE DATED NOVEMBER 8, 1993." LAVIKKA SIGNED A "FIRST AMENDMENT OF LEASE AGREEMENT" IN 1994, WHICH EXTENDED THE LENGTH OF THE LEASE AND CHANGED THE NAME OF THE TENANT WITH WHICH LAVVIKA WAS AFFILIATED. IN 1996, LAVIKKA SIGNED A SECOND AMENDMENT AND EXTENSION OF LEASE AGREEMENT WHICH EXTENDED THE LENGTH OF THE LEASE; CHANGED RENT SCHEDULE; AND MODIFIED SEVERAL PARAGRAPHS OF THE LEASE. SEVERAL MORE AMENDMENT AND MODIFICATION OF LEASE AGREEMENTS WERE EXECUTED OVER THE YEARS, BUT LAVIKKA WAS NOT A SIGNATORY TO THOSE AGREEMENTS. KAMMS ALLEGES NOW THAT THE TENANT HAS FAILED TO PERFORM THROUGH NON-PAYMENT OF RENT AND FILED CLAIMS AGAINST LAVIKKA FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT, BREACH OF GUARANTEE, UNJUST ENRICHMENT, AND PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL. DEFENDANT SEEKS TO DISMISS THE CLAIMS AGAINST HIM. A CONTRACT CANNOT BE UNILATERALLY MODIFIED. IN ORDER TO MODIFY A CONTRACT, THE PARTIES TO THAT CONTRACT MUST MUTUALLY CONSENT TO THE MODIFICATION. NAGLE HEATING & AIR CONDITIONING CO. V. HESKETT, 66 OHIO APP.3D 547, 550, 585 N.E.2D 866 (4TH DIST.1990) SEE, GENERALLY, SANDUSKY CTY. PARK DIST. BD. OF COMMRS. V. ANNADALE SCRAP CO. (1978), 60 OHIO APP.2D 415, 14 O.O.3D 430, 398 N.E.2D 810. BECAUSE LAVIKKA NEVER CONSENTED TO ANY MODIFICATIONS TO THE CONTRACT AFTER 1996, HE CANNOT BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR THOSE MODIFICATIONS. KAMMS DOES NOT ALLEGE THAT ANY OF THE UNPAID RENT IS FROM A TIME PERIOD PRIOR TO THE 1999 AMENDMENT AND MODIFICATION OF THE LEASE (WHICH WAS THE FIRST AMENDMENT NOT SIGNED BY LAVIKKA). INDEED, IF THE BREACH KAMMS SEEKS TO ATTRIBUTE TO LAVIKKA DID OCCUR BEFORE 1999, SUCH BREACH WOULD NO LONGER BE ENFORCEABLE EITHER DUE TO THE ASSENT OF THE BREACH BY KAMMS OR BECAUSE IT CAN NO LONGER BE ENFORCED DUE TO THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS. ALL CLAIMS AGAINST DEFENDANT LAVIKKA ARE DISMISSED. PARTIAL. THIS ENTRY TAKEN BY JUDGE TIMOTHY J MCGINTY. NOTICE ISSUED
  28. MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE ANSWER OF DEFENDANT VANESSA STASKUS, FILED 06/23/2023, IS GRANTED. DEFENDANT STASKUS TO RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT BY 07/31/2023. THIS ENTRY TAKEN BY JUDGE TIMOTHY J MCGINTY. NOTICE ISSUED
  29. EPLY BRIEF FILED BY D1 RICHARD STASKEVICIUS MARK D MCGRAW 0025119 REPLY BRIEF OF RICHARD STASKEVICIUS
  30. RIEF IN OPPOSITION FILED BY P1 KAMMS PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER, LLC THOMAS M HORWITZ 0062323 PLAINTIFF'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS STASKEVICIUS AND LAVIKKA'S MOTIONS TO DISMISS
  31. OTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE ANSWER OF DEFENDANT VANESSA STASKUS 07/11/2023 - GRANTED
  32. OTION TO DISMISS FILED MOTION TO DISMISS OF DEFENDANT RICHARD STASKEVICIUS 07/18/2023 - GRANTED
  33. P1 KAMMS PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER, LLC'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME WITH WHICH TO RESPOND TO MOTIONS TO DISMISS, FILED 05/22/2023 BY THOMAS M HORWITZ 0062323, IS GRANTED. PLAINTIFF IS GIVEN UNTIL 07/03/2023 TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT LAVIKKA'S MOTION TO DISMISS; ANY REPLY TO BE FILED PURSUANT TO THE CIVIL RULES. DEFENDANT STASKEVICIUS HAS NOT FILED A MOTION TO DISMISS IN THE PROPER MANNER, AND ANY FILING PURPORTING TO BE A MOTION TO DISMISS FROM THIS DEFENDANT WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED BY THE COURT. LITIGANTS SHOULD RECOGNIZE THAT THEY ARE LITIGATING IN THE LARGEST TRIAL COURT IN THE STATE; WE HAVE AN E-FILING SYSTEM TO HELP THE PARTIES AND THE COURT EFFICIENTLY MANAGE THE MOTIONS AND OTHER PAPERS; PARTIES SHOULD NOT INVENT WAYS THAT CONFUSE FILED DOCUMENTS AND PREVENT THE EFILING SYSTEM AND THE COURT STAFF FROM LOCATING MOTIONS; MATCHING BRIEFS TO PREVIOUSLY FILED MOTIONS; AND SO FORTH. FILINGS NOT PROPERLY CODED IN E-FILING WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED BY THE COURT. THIS ENTRY TAKEN BY JUDGE TIMOTHY J MCGINTY. NOTICE ISSUED
  34. ERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT NO. 50383895 RETURNED 05/13/2023 FAILURE OF SERVICE ON DEFENDANT NIDA ENTERPRISES, INC - NOT DELIVRBL AS ADDR NOTICE MAILED TO PLAINTIFF(S) ATTORNEY
  35. UMS AMENDED COMPLNT(50728865) SENT BY CERTIFIED MAIL. TO: NIDA ENTERPRISES, INC C/O RITA ZVIRBLIS 17480 LORAIN AVE., UNIT E CLEVELAND, OH 44111
  36. UMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  37. RIT FEE
  38. D3 MATTI LAVIKKA DAVID M GAREAU 0066687 DEFENDANT MATTI LAVIKKA'S MOTION FOR 30 DAY LEAVE TO PLEAD OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT, FILED 04/18/2023, IS GRANTED. DEFENDANT TIMELY RESPONDED TO THE COMPLAINT ON 05/18/2023. THIS ENTRY TAKEN BY JUDGE JANET R BURNSIDE. NOTICE ISSUED
  39. EQUEST FOR SERVICE FILED INSTRUCTIONS FOR SERVICE-NIDA
  40. UMS AMENDED COMPLNT(50693857) SENT BY REGULAR MAIL SERVICE. TO: RITA ZVIRBLIS 1470 ORCHARD GROVE AVE LAKEWOOD, OH 44107-0000 ANSWER DATE: 06/20/2023
  41. UMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  42. RIT FEE
  43. OTION FILED FOR P1 KAMMS PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER, LLC THOMAS M HORWITZ 0062323 PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME WITH WHICH TO RESPOND TO MOTIONS TO DISMISS 06/15/2023 - GRANTED
  44. EQUEST FOR SERVICE FILED INSTRUCTIONS FOR SERVICE-ZVIRBLIS
  45. OTICE OF APPEARANCE, FILED P1 KAMMS PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER, LLC THOMAS M HORWITZ 0062323. PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF APPEARANCE OF CO-COUNSEL
  46. OTION TO DISMISS FILED DEFENDANT MATTI LAVIKKA'S MOTION TO DISMISS AMENDED COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO CIV. R. 12(B)(6) 07/14/2023 - GRANTED
  47. ERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT NO. 50383896 RETURNED 5/13/2023 FAILURE OF SERVICE ON DEFENDANT ZVIRBLIS/RITA/ - UNCLAIMED NOTICE MAILED TO PLAINTIFF(S) ATTORNEY
  48. ERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT NO. 50383895 RETURNED 5/13/2023 FAILURE OF SERVICE ON DEFENDANT NIDA ENTERPRISES, INC - UNCLAIMED NOTICE MAILED TO PLAINTIFF(S) ATTORNEY
  49. EPOSIT AMOUNT PAID MARK D MCGRAW
  50. NSWER AND CROSSCLAIM $75 ANSWER, MOTION TO DISMISS AND CROSS-CLAIM OF RICHARD STASKEVICIUS TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
  51. SPS RECEIPT NO. 50383894 DELIVERED BY USPS 04/26/2023 STASKUS/VANESSA/ PROCESSED BY COC 05/03/2023.
  52. SPS RECEIPT NO. 50383893 DELIVERED BY USPS 04/25/2023 STASKEVICIUS/RICHARD/ PROCESSED BY COC 05/03/2023.
  53. 8DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME, FILED 04/12/2023, IS GRANTED. DEFENDANT ZVIRBLIS TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT BY 05/20/2023. THIS ENTRY TAKEN BY JUDGE BRENDAN J SHEEHAN. NOTICE ISSUED
  54. SPS RECEIPT NO. 50377204 DELIVERED BY USPS 04/20/2023 LAVIKKA/MATTI/ PROCESSED BY COC 04/26/2023.
  55. OTION FILED FOR D3 MATTI LAVIKKA DAVID M GAREAU 0066687 DEFENDANT MATTI LAVIKKA'S MOTION FOR 30 DAY LEAVE TO PLEAD OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT 05/25/2023 - GRANTED
  56. UMS AMENDED COMPLNT(50383896) SENT BY CERTIFIED MAIL. TO: RITA ZVIRBLIS 1470 ORCHARD GROVE AVE LAKEWOOD, OH 44107-0000
  57. UMS AMENDED COMPLNT(50383895) SENT BY CERTIFIED MAIL. TO: NIDA ENTERPRISES, INC C/O RITA ZVIRBLIS STATUTORY AGENT 1470 ORCHARD GROVE AVE LAKEWOOD, OH 44107-0000
  58. UMS AMENDED COMPLNT(50383894) SENT BY CERTIFIED MAIL. TO: VANESSA STASKUS 17722 FRANKLIN AVENUE LAKEWOOD, OH 44107
  59. UMS AMENDED COMPLNT(50383893) SENT BY CERTIFIED MAIL. TO: RICHARD STASKEVICIUS 2064 ARTHUR AVENUE LAKEWOOD, OH 44107
  60. UMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  61. UMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  62. UMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  63. UMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  64. RIT FEE
  65. RIT FEE
  66. RIT FEE
  67. RIT FEE
  68. UMS AMENDED COMPLNT(50377204) SENT BY CERTIFIED MAIL. TO: MATTI LAVIKKA 20422 ORCHARD GROVE AVENUE ROCKY RIVER, OH 44116
  69. UMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  70. RIT FEE
  71. EQUEST FOR SERVICE FILED 1ST AMEDED COMPLAINT
  72. EQUEST FOR SERVICE FILED 1ST AMEDED COMPLAINT
  73. REQUEST FOR SERVICE FILED 1ST AMEDED COMPLAINT
  74. REQUEST FOR SERVICE FILED 1ST AMEDED COMPLAINT
  75. DEPOSIT AMOUNT PAID BRYAN S. MOLLOHAN
  76. AMENDED COMPLAINT $75
  77. DOCKET HAS BEEN STRICKEN BY ORDER OF THE COURT (DOCKET 144135900 04/13/2023 OT)
  78. : THE "GENERAL PLEADING FILED BY P1 KAMMS PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER, LLC ATTORNEY BRYAN S. MOLLOHAN 0069782 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT" IS STRICKEN FOR BEING IMPROPERLY E-FILED. IT IS NOT OPEN TO THE PARTIES IN EFILING TO PICK ANY CODING CLASSIFICATION FOR THEIR FILINGS AS A MATTER OF WHIM. IT IS REQUIRED TO BE ACCURATE OR THE COURT WILL STRIKE IT. THIS ENTRY TAKEN BY JUDGE JANET R BURNSIDE. NOTICE ISSUED
  79. DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME 04/28/2023 - GRANTED
  80. USPS RECEIPT NO. 50111817 DELIVERED BY USPS 03/20/2023 NIDA ENTERPRISES, INC PROCESSED BY COC 03/29/2023.
  81. USPS RECEIPT NO. 50111816 DELIVERED BY USPS 03/21/2023 LAVIKKA/MATTI/ PROCESSED BY COC 03/29/2023.
  82. USPS RECEIPT NO. 50111814 DELIVERED BY USPS 03/20/2023 STASKEVICIUS/RICHARD/ PROCESSED BY COC 03/29/2023.
  83. USPS RECEIPT NO. 50111815 DELIVERED BY USPS 03/18/2023 STASKUS/VANESSA/ PROCESSED BY COC 03/22/2023.
  84. SUMS COMPLAINT(50111817) SENT BY CERTIFIED MAIL. TO: NIDA ENTERPRISES, INC C/O RITA ZVIRBLIS 17480 LORAIN AVE., UNIT E CLEVELAND, OH 44111
  85. SUMS COMPLAINT(50111816) SENT BY CERTIFIED MAIL. TO: MATTI LAVIKKA 20422 ORCHARD GROVE AVENUE ROCKY RIVER, OH 44116
  86. SUMS COMPLAINT(50111815) SENT BY CERTIFIED MAIL. TO: VANESSA STASKUS 17722 FRANKLIN AVENUE LAKEWOOD, OH 44107
  87. SUMS COMPLAINT(50111814) SENT BY CERTIFIED MAIL. TO: RICHARD STASKEVICIUS 2064 ARTHUR AVENUE LAKEWOOD, OH 44107
  88. SUMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  89. SUMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  90. SUMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  91. SUMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  92. WRIT FEE
  93. WRIT FEE
  94. WRIT FEE
  95. WRIT FEE
  96. JUDGE JOHN D SUTULA ASSIGNED (RANDOM); COMMERCIAL DOCKET CASE, REASSIGNED TO JUDGE MICHAEL J RUSSO (RANDOM)
  97. JUDGE JOHN D SUTULA ASSIGNED (RANDOM)
  98. LEGAL RESEARCH
  99. LEGAL NEWS
  100. LEGAL AID
  101. COURT SPECIAL PROJECTS FUND
  102. COMPUTER FEE
  103. CLERK'S FEE
  104. DEPOSIT AMOUNT PAID BRYAN S. MOLLOHAN
  105. LERK'S FEE
  106. EPOSIT AMOUNT PAID BRYAN S. MOLLOHAN

See the patterns behind this case

The free view above tells you who’s in the room. The detailed reports below show how the room tends to behave — using the same public records lawyers quietly rely on before every hearing.

  • Judge Report

    How this judge has ruled in cases like yours — case mix, motion outcomes, and historical docket. Judges set the floor of what’s possible in your courtroom.

  • Attorney vs Judge Report

    Everything in the Judge Report, plus how your attorney has actually performed in front of this judge. Attorneys move you off the floor — or don’t.

One-time payment, no subscription. Reports describe past public court activity — they don’t predict outcomes and they aren’t legal advice.

Get Free Case Details

Enter your email to receive case information including parties, docket entries, and status updates.

By submitting you agree to our Privacy Policy.

Need this case removed? Enter your email above — the confirmation email includes a case removal link.

Full Analytics Report

  • Complete case narrative
  • Judge details and rulings
  • Case disposition and outcome
  • All docket entries
  • Related cases and filings
$20
One-time purchase

Legal Analytics Has Been Featured In

Featured in Forbes, Bloomberg, The New Yorker, Above The Law, American Bar Association, and more