Cedar Fair was not required to open Cedar Point Amusement Park in May 2020 for season pass holders.

Cedar Fair was not required to open Cedar Point Amusement Park in May 2020 for season pass holders.

Cedar Point Amusement Park could alter its dates of operation without advance notice and close rides and attractions during the shutdown ordered by the state government in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Supreme Court of Ohio ruled today.

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court determined that Cedar Fair, the owner of the Sandusky amusement park, was not contractually bound by its season passes to open its parks in May and June of 2020.

Justice Sharon L. Kennedy wrote in the Court’s opinion that Cedar Fair reserved its right in the season pass terms to adjust the dates of operation in its parks without notice and to close its rides and attractions “for weather and other conditions.”

“[A]nd there is no question that Ohio’s government-mandated shutdown during the COVID-19 pandemic was a condition that required Cedar Fair to close its parks for approximately two months,” the opinion stated.

State Orders Closures Because of Pandemic
Laura Valentine purchased a 2020 season pass to use at Cedar Point. In March 2020, the state government ordered amusement parks to close due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Cedar Fair did not open its parks in May and June.

Valentine filed a lawsuit on behalf of herself and other individuals who purchased a season pass for 2020. She alleged that Cedar Fair breached the contract with season pass holders as described in the terms and conditions of the pass. Alternatively, she argued that the company had been “unjustly enriched” by selling season passes that it did not honor, and she requested reimbursement for the money Cedar Fair received for the sales.

The terms of the season pass stated that it was a revokable license that gave the holder admission to Cedar Point and use of its open rides and attractions on regularly scheduled operating days. The pass was “non-transferable, non-refundable, non-exchangeable and not valid for cash.” The terms also explained: “All operating dates and hours are subject to change without notice. All rides and attractions are subject to closings and cancellations for weather or other conditions.”

Amusement Park Owner Wants Case Thrown Out
Cedar Fair asked the Erie County Common Pleas Court to dismiss Valentine’s complaint. The trial court noted that the season pass terms and conditions included no specific opening day for the amusement park. Because Cedar Fair was permitted by the terms of the pass to modify the park’s operating dates, the company did not violate the contract by delaying the opening day due to the pandemic, the court found .

The court dismissed the complaint with prejudice.

Valentine appealed to the Sixth District Court of Appeals, which reversed the trial court. The Sixth District concluded that Valentine’s lawsuit could move forward because the terms and conditions of the pass she had purchased were ambiguous and, therefore, the dispute should be heard by a judge or jury.

Cedar Fair appealed to the Supreme Court, which accepted the case.

Supreme Court Reviewed Closure in Response to Pandemic
Valentine argued to the Supreme Court that the season pass terms and conditions were a contract, giving her and other pass holders access to the park for the 2020 season, which she said ran from May through October. She maintained that Cedar Fair breached the contract by failing to open Cedar Point for two months. 

The Supreme Court ruled, however, that Cedar Fair was not required by the season pass terms to open the park in May, even if Cedar Point’s season regularly begins in May and ends in October.

Justice Kennedy noted that “[i]n property law, when a landowner gives another person permission to do something on his or her property without granting that person any estate in the property, that permission is called a license.” She explained that Valentine obtained a revocable license to enter Cedar Point in consideration for the season pass purchase price. That permission to enter was limited by terms and conditions in which Cedar Fair reserved the right to change its operating dates without notice and to close its rides and attractions “for weather and other conditions.”

In accordance with these provisions, Cedar Fair did not open the amusement park in May and June 2020 due to the shutdown ordered in response to the pandemic, and it opened Cedar Point to season pass holders in July 2020, after the shutdown was lifted. Under the circumstances, Valentine received the benefit of her bargain from the season pass, even if the 2020 season was shorter than she had expected at the time of her purchase, the Court concluded.

“Valentine’s breach-of-contract action therefore fails as a matter of law, and she cannot sue for unjust enrichment when Cedar Fair abided by the terms of its agreement with her,” the opinion stated.

The Court reinstated the trial court judgment.

2021-0981. Valentine v. Cedar Fair, L.P., Slip Opinion No. 2022-Ohio-3710.

View oral argument video of this case.

Please note: Opinion summaries are prepared by the Office of Public Information for the general public and news media. Opinion summaries are not prepared for every opinion, but only for noteworthy cases. Opinion summaries are not to be considered as official headnotes or syllabi of court opinions. The full text of this and other court opinions are available online.

PDF files may be viewed, printed, and searched using the free Acrobat^® Reader
Acrobat Reader is a trademark of Adobe Systems Incorporated.