Fast Tract Title Services, Inc. has faced a legal setback in its ongoing battle against Denver Barry, with the Ohio Court of Appeals affirming the dismissal of their complaint. The case, filed by Fast Tract Title Services, Inc. in the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas on June 9, 2023, accused Denver Barry of fraud and sought to pierce the corporate veil to hold him personally liable for debts incurred by his company, 1229 Summit LLC.
The legal dispute centers around a failed real estate transaction involving property at 8018 Garfield Boulevard in Garfield Heights, Ohio. Fast Tract Title Services was engaged as the escrow agent for the sale between 1229 Summit LLC and buyers Lawrence and Valerie Cater. According to Fast Tract’s complaint, Barry misrepresented 1229 Summit as a viable entity when it was allegedly undercapitalized and essentially a sham. This misrepresentation led Fast Tract to incur significant legal fees defending itself in previous lawsuits related to this transaction.
Fast Tract had previously won a judgment against 1229 Summit LLC for $16,319.56 in attorney fees after the company failed to appear for trial in a breach-of-contract lawsuit filed in 2016. However, when Fast Tract sought to recover these damages from Barry personally through claims of fraud and piercing the corporate veil, they encountered legal obstacles. The court found that their claims were barred by the economic-loss rule and statute of limitations.
In its ruling dated June 5, 2025, the trial court dismissed Fast Tract’s complaint on multiple grounds: res judicata (claim preclusion), failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted due to economic loss rule restrictions, and statute of limitations issues. On appeal, while res judicata was overturned as grounds for dismissal by the appellate court, other arguments presented by Barry were upheld.
Barry’s defense successfully argued that since Fast Tract had already been awarded damages under contract law for breach of contract against 1229 Summit LLC in prior litigation, they could not seek additional recovery under tort law for fraud without showing distinct damages beyond those covered by their initial judgment. Furthermore, because Fast Tract’s fraud claim did not allege damages separate from those awarded previously or within an independent duty outside contractual obligations—their pursuit fell short legally.
Fast Tract’s efforts to hold Barry personally accountable through piercing-the-corporate-veil doctrine also faltered because this is not recognized as an independent cause but rather as a remedy tied directly into substantive claims like fraud—which had been dismissed appropriately alongside it.
Representing parties included L. Bryan Carr for appellant Fast Tract Title Services and Scott J. Friedman for appellee Denver Barry before Judges William A Klatt*, Sean C Gallagher P.J., Kathleen Ann Keough J., with Case ID No: CV-23-980782.
Source: 2026Ohio461_Fast_Tract_Title_Services_Inc_v_Barry_Opinion_Ohio_Court_of_Appeals.pdf