Bowers v. Herron

2016 Ohio 766
CourtOhio Court of Appeals
DecidedFebruary 26, 2016
Docket15 CA 34
StatusPublished

This text of 2016 Ohio 766 (Bowers v. Herron) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bowers v. Herron, 2016 Ohio 766 (Ohio Ct. App. 2016).

Opinion

[Cite as Bowers v. Herron, 2016-Ohio-766.]

COURT OF APPEALS FAIRFIELD COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

JUDGES: BRANDY D. BOWERS, et al. : Hon. John W. Wise, P.J. : Hon. Patricia A. Delaney, J. Plaintiffs-Appellees : Hon. Craig R. Baldwin, J. : -vs- : : LISA A. HERRON, et al. : : Defendants-Appellants : Case No. 15 CA 34 : DAVID M. BEST and : SAM N. GHOUBRIAL, M.D. : : Interested Third Parties : OPINION

CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Civil Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas, Case No. 2013 CV 403

JUDGMENT: Reversed and Remanded

DATE OF JUDGMENT ENTRY: February 26, 2016

APPEARANCES:

For Plaintiffs-Appellees For Defendants-Appellants

ROBERT S. ROBY STEPHEN P. GRIFFIN CURRY, ROBY & MULVEY CO., LLC MICHAEL J. KAHLENBERG 30 Northwoods Boulevard WINKHART, RAMBACHER & GRIFFIN Suite 300 825 South Main Street Columbus, Ohio 43235 North Canton, Ohio 44720 [Cite as Bowers v. Herron, 2016-Ohio-766.]

Wise, P.J.,

{¶1} Appellants Sam N. Ghoubrial, M.D. and Attorney David M. Best appeal from

the May 19, 2015, decision of the Court of Common Pleas, Fairfield County, awarding

$1,525.00 to Defendants for attorney fees.

{¶2} Appellees did not file a brief in this matter.

STATEMENT OF THE FACTS AND CASE

{¶3} The relevant facts as taken from Appellants’ brief and the record are as

follows:

{¶4} The underlying civil action was filed on May 3, 2013, by Plaintiffs Brandy

Bowers and Bobby Reese against Defendants Lisa A. Herron and Steve Herron for

personal injuries sustained in a September 28, 2012, automobile collision.

{¶5} Appellant, Sam N. Ghoubrial, M.D. was one of Plaintiffs' treating physicians

and appeared for a videotaped trial deposition on November 4, 2014. During the

deposition, Defendants' Counsel asked nine (9) separate questions regarding Dr.

Ghoubrial's medical practice, including whether he is "referred" patients, his billing

practices, and the method of transportation Dr. Ghoubrial uses to travel to patient

appointments. (Deposition of Sam N. Ghoubrial, M.D. at pgs. 26-38, 50-51, 53, and 56).

Dr. Ghoubrial was instructed not to answer these questions by his counsel, David M. Best,

Esq. due to the sensitive and confidential nature of the information. (Ghoubrial Depo. pgs.

1-61).

{¶6} On December 9, 2014, Defendants filed a Motion to Compel Discovery, or

Alternatively, Motion to Strike relative to the unanswered questions at Dr. Ghoubrial's trial

deposition. Fairfield County, Case No. 15 CA 34 3

{¶7} Also on December 9, 2014, Defendants filed a Motion for Attorneys' Fees

and Costs against Dr. Ghoubrial and Attorney Best related to the Motion to Compel and

the nine unanswered questions from the deposition. The Motion for Attorneys' Fees

specifically asked the trial court to award fees for all costs incurred in conducting Dr.

Ghoubrial's deposition.

{¶8} On December 11, 2014, Defendants' Motions were opposed by Plaintiffs.

{¶9} On December 29, 2014, Dr. Ghoubrial filed a Brief in Opposition to

Defendants' Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Costs.

{¶10} On January 12, 2015, after obtaining leave of court, Defendants filed their

Reply in Support of the Motions.

{¶11} On January 22, 2015, the trial court entered an Order granting Defendants'

Motion to Compel (in part) and granting Defendants' Motion for Attorneys' Fees. In its

order, the trial court specifically ordered that Attorney Best compensate: 1) Defendants'

reasonable attorneys' fees, costs, and expenses arising from a follow-up deposition of Dr.

Ghoubrial upon the nine (9) unanswered questions from the November 4, 2014 Trial

Deposition; and, 2) Defendants' reasonable attorneys' fees for time spent preparing the

Motion to Compel, Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Costs, and the Reply in Support of the

Motions.

{¶12} On February 4, 2015, Dr. Ghoubrial submitted sworn written responses to

each of the nine (9) pending questions from the Trial Deposition, answering each in turn.

{¶13} On March 3, 2015, Plaintiffs and Defendants proceeded to trial.

{¶14} On March 4, 2015, the jury rendered a defense verdict. (March 30, 2015

Judgment Entry on Verdict, hereinafter "Final Entry"). Fairfield County, Case No. 15 CA 34 4

{¶15} In the Final Entry, the trial court specifically noted that it was issuing a final

judgment upon all matters concerning the dispute:

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that final

judgment is entered in favor of Defendant on Plaintiff's Complaint. Court

costs to Plaintiffs.

This is a final appealable order and there is no just cause for delay.

(emphasis added).

{¶16} Neither Plaintiffs nor Defendants appealed the Final Entry.

{¶17} On May 19, 2015, the trial court issued an Order in which it awarded

$1,525.00 to Defendants relative to their Motion for Attorneys' Fees.

{¶18} Appellants David Best, Esq. and Sam N. Ghoubrial, M.D. now appeal,

assigning the following errors for review:

ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR

{¶19} “I. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED BY PROCEEDING WITHOUT

JURISDICTION FOLLOWING ITS MAY 19, 2015 FINAL JUDGMENT ENTRY

RESOLVING ALL CLAIMS SET FORTH IN THE COMPLAINT.

{¶20} “II. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN AWARDING ATTORNEYS' FEES TO

APPELLEES WHEN IT CONSIDERED EVIDENTIARY MATERIALS NOT REFLECTED

IN THE RECORD.

{¶21} “III. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN AWARDING ATTORNEYS' FEES TO

APPELLEES AGAINST APPELLANTS IN FAILING TO CONDUCT A HEARING.” Fairfield County, Case No. 15 CA 34 5

I.

{¶22} In their First Assignment of Error, Appellants argue that the trial court did

not have jurisdiction to grant attorney fees in this matter. We disagree.

{¶23} Upon review of the record, we find that the trial court ordered that attorney

fees be paid in its January 22, 2014, Judgment Entry to reimburse Defendants'

reasonable attorneys' fees, costs, and expenses arising from a follow-up deposition of Dr.

Ghoubrial upon the nine (9) unanswered questions from the November 4, 2014, trial

Deposition; and for Defendants' reasonable attorneys' fees for the time spent preparing

the Motion to Compel, Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Costs, and the Reply in Support of

the Motions.

{¶24} Although Defendants did not present the trial court with the time records

requested until after final judgment in this matter, the court’s order was made prior to final

judgment in this case. We therefore find that the trial court had jurisdiction when it made

the decision to award attorney fees to Defendants.

{¶25} Appellants’ First Assignment of Error is overruled.

II., III.

{¶26} In their Second and Third Assignments of Error, Appellant argues that the

trial court erred in considering evidence not in the record and in not conducting a hearing

prior to making an award of attorney fees. We agree.

{¶27} Upon review of the record, we find that on March 10, 2015, pursuant to the

trial court’s Order of January 22, 2015, counsel for Defendants sent a letter to the trial

court which included an itemized list of expenses incurred, listing 8.5 hours spent and

$1,525.00 incurred. On May 19, 2015, the trial court filed an Order stating: Fairfield County, Case No. 15 CA 34 6

The Court received Defendants’ affidavit on March 16, 2015. Upon

the Court’s review of the expenses set forth therein, the Court finds that all

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2016 Ohio 766, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bowers-v-herron-ohioctapp-2016.