Neal-Pettit v. Lahman

2010 Ohio 1829, 125 Ohio St. 3d 327
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedMay 4, 2010
Docket2009-0325
StatusPublished
Cited by29 cases

This text of 2010 Ohio 1829 (Neal-Pettit v. Lahman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Neal-Pettit v. Lahman, 2010 Ohio 1829, 125 Ohio St. 3d 327 (Ohio 2010).

Opinions

Lanzinger, J.

{¶ 1} We accepted this discretionary appeal to determine whether an insurer must pay an attorney-fee award on behalf of its insured under her insurance policy and whether payment of attorney fees awarded solely as a result of punitive damages violates the public policy of Ohio. After reviewing the policy, we affirm the judgment of the court of appeals, holding that the policy does cover attorney-fee awards and that public policy does not prevent such coverage.

Facts

{¶ 2} Appellee, Kimberly Neal-Pettit, filed suit against Linda Lahman for compensatory and punitive damages due to personal injuries sustained in an automobile accident on March 27, 2003. As alleged in the complaint, when Lahman struck Neal-Pettit’s vehicle, she was intoxicated and fleeing the scene of an earlier collision. The case was heard by a jury, which returned a verdict against Lahman for compensatory damages totaling $113,800 and punitive damages totaling $75,000. In addition, the jury awarded attorney fees to Neal-Pettit based on a finding that Lahman had acted with malice. The trial court set the amount of attorney fees at $46,825 and also awarded Neal-Pettit $10,084.96 in expenses.

[328]*328{¶ 3} Lahman maintained automobile insurance through appellant, Allstate Insurance Company (“Allstate”). Allstate paid Neal-Pettit the amounts awarded as compensatory damages, interest, and expenses, but denied payment of the punitive damages and attorney fees.

{¶ 4} Neal-Pettit filed a supplemental complaint against Allstate for payment of the attorney fees. The trial court entered summary judgment in favor of Neal-Pettit on the issue. Allstate appealed, arguing that it had not contracted to pay attorney fees and that an attorney-fee award is an element of punitive damages, which public policy prevents an insurer from covering. The Eighth District affirmed the trial court’s decision, holding that attorney fees are “conceptually distinct” from punitive damages and that attorney fees are not expressly excluded from coverage by the language of the policy. Neal-Pettit v. Lahman, 8th Dist. No. 91551, 2008-Ohio-6653, 2008 WL 5259726, ¶ 5.

{¶ 5} We accepted jurisdiction over Allstate’s appeal on three issues: (1) whether it is against public policy for an insurer to pay an attorney-fee award made in conjunction with a punitive-damages award, (2) whether an attorney-fee award can be characterized as “[damages] because of bodily injury,” as required for coverage under Allstate’s policy, and (3) whether Allstate’s policy term excluding coverage of “punitive or exemplary damages, fines or penalties” excludes coverage of attorney fees that are awarded in conjunction with a punitive-damages award.

{¶ 6} After examining Allstate’s policy, we affirm the judgment of the Eighth District Court of Appeals.

Legal Analysis

Insurance Policy — Coverage Provision

{¶ 7} An insurer’s obligations to its insured are governed by the coverage stated in the policy. Gearing v. Nationwide Ins. Co. (1996), 76 Ohio St.3d 34, 36, 665 N.E.2d 1115. Allstate argues that it is clear from the insurance policy’s general statement of coverage that it did not agree to cover awards of attorney fees.

{¶ 8} It is true that the policy does not discuss attorney fees within the insuring clause. The policy’s general statement of coverage explains:

{¶ 9} “If a premium is shown on the Policy Declarations for Bodily Injury Liability Coverage and Property Damage Liability Coverage, Allstate will pay damages which an insured person is legally obligated to pay because of:
{¶ 10} “1. bodily injury sustained by any person, and
{¶ 11} “2. damage to, or destruction of, property.”
[329]*329{¶ 12} “Bodily injury” is defined by the policy as “physical harm to the body, sickness, disease, or death.” (Boldface sic, indicating defined terms.)

{¶ 13} The question is whether the attorney fees awarded are damages that Lahman is legally obligated to pay because of the bodily injury sustained by Neal-Pettit. The policy does not define the word “damages.” Allstate argues that the award is not covered under the policy, because attorney fees are not damages themselves, but are derivative of punitive damages and thus are not awarded as a result of bodily injury.

{¶ 14} Allstate argues that the attorney-fee award is an element of the punitive-damages award because both are made in cases of malicious conduct. The dissent also points out that an attorney-fee award is “directly tied to and dependent upon an award of punitive damages.” Dissenting opinion at ¶ 26. However, the fact that the awards have similar bases is irrelevant. We have recognized that attorney-fee awards and punitive-damages awards are distinct: “In an action to recover damages for a tort which involves the ingredients of fraud, malice, or insult, a jury may go beyond the rule of mere compensation to the party aggrieved, and award exemplary or punitive damages * * *. In such a case, the jury may, in their estimate of compensatory damages, take into consideration and include reasonable fees of counsel employed by the plaintiff in the prosecution of his action.” (Emphasis sic.) Roberts v. Mason (1859), 10 Ohio St. 277, 1859 WL 78, paragraphs one and two of the syllabus. See also Smith v. Pittsburg, Ft. Wayne & Chicago Ry. Co. (1872), 23 Ohio St. 10, 18, 1872 WL 50 (“The doctrine * * * announced [in Roberts] is that in a case where punitive as well as compensatory damages may be awarded, the jury * * * should regard counsel fees as compensation and not as punishment”); Zappitelli v. Miller, 114 Ohio St.3d 102, 2007-Ohio-3251, 868 N.E.2d 968, ¶ 6 (when an award of attorney fees is made in addition to a punitive-damages award, it is awarded as an element of compensatory damages).

{¶ 15} Allstate relies on Digital & Analog Design Corp. v. N. Supply Co. (1992), 63 Ohio St.3d 657, 590 N.E.2d 737, a case in which we stated that requiring a party’to pay the other party’s attorney fees is a punitive, and thus equitable, remedy. But Digital’s, discussion of attorney fees was explicitly characterized as dicta in Zoppo v. Homestead Ins. Co. (1994), 71 Ohio St.3d 552, 557, 644 N.E.2d 397. In Zoppo, the court “rejected] the reasoning espoused in Digital which treats the right to trial by jury in cases assessing attorney fees the same as the right in cases of punitive damages.” Id.

{¶ 16} Cases such as Roberts, Zappitelli, and Zoppo explain that although an award of attorney fees may stem from an award of punitive damages, the attorney-fee award itself is not an element of the punitive-damages award.

[330]*330{¶ 17} Allstate next argues that an attorney-fee award is not covered under its policy, because attorney fees are not “[damages] because of bodily injury,” as required by the policy, but rather are awarded as a result of punitive damages. Although, in this case, attorney fees were awarded as a result of an award of punitive damages, they also stem from the underlying bodily injury.

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

Related

Motorists Mut. Ins. Co. v. Soussou
2026 Ohio 984 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2026)
Blue Water Condominium Assn., Inc. v. Motorists Mut. Ins. Co.
2025 Ohio 772 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2025)
Motorists Mut. Ins. Co. v. Ironics, Inc. (Slip Opinion)
2022 Ohio 841 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2022)
Alegre, Inc. v. Hyde Component Sales, Inc.
2022 Ohio 542 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2022)
Cruz v. English Nanny & Governess School
2020 Ohio 4216 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2020)
Spires v. Oxford Mining Co.
116 N.E.3d 717 (Court of Appeals of Ohio, Seventh District, Belmont County, 2018)
Raudins v. Hobbs
104 N.E.3d 1040 (Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga County, 2018)
Pelletier v. Campbell (Slip Opinion)
2018 Ohio 2121 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2018)
Disciplinary Counsel v. Smith.
2017 Ohio 9087 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2017)
Goodell v. Motorists Mut. Ins. Co.
2017 Ohio 8425 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2017)
Cruz v. English Nanny & Governess School Inc.
2017 Ohio 4176 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2017)
LM Insurance Corp. v. Szuhay
222 F. Supp. 3d 558 (N.D. Ohio, 2016)
Premier Therapy, L.L.C v. Childs
2016 Ohio 7934 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2016)
Oriani v. Reach Out Disposal, L.L.C.
2016 Ohio 7392 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2016)
Gilson v. Am. Inst. of Alternative Medicine
2016 Ohio 1324 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2016)
Roberts v. Mike's Trucking, Ltd.
2014 Ohio 766 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2014)
World Harvest Church v. Grange Mut. Cas. Co.
2013 Ohio 5707 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2010 Ohio 1829, 125 Ohio St. 3d 327, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/neal-pettit-v-lahman-ohio-2010.