Winkler Bldg. v. Fairview Sh. Center, Unpublished Decision (12-24-2003)
This text of 2003 Ohio 7073 (Winkler Bldg. v. Fairview Sh. Center, Unpublished Decision (12-24-2003)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law.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.
Opinion
{¶ 2} Appellant, Winkler Building Partnership ("Winkler"), was the owner of real property located at 149 East Liberty Street in Wooster, Ohio. Edgar Winkler, the partnership's managing partner, executed a real estate sales agreement in 1986 with Fairview Shopping Center Corporation ("Fairview") wherein the property in question would be sold to Fairview for $191,000 plus interest, subject to a purchase money mortgage. Said mortgage would be due and payable on June 30, 2001.
{¶ 3} Appellant Winkler filed a complaint against Fairview alleging breach of contract and trespass on July 16, 2002, but failed to attach the original contract. On October 30, 2002, the trial court granted Fairview's motion for a more definite statement, and on December 29, 2002, Winkler submitted its first amended complaint, including the contract in question. Appellant subsequently filed a notice of voluntary dismissal pursuant to Civ.R. 41(A) when it was discovered that the contract contained "non-recourse" language.1 Fairview then filed a motion for attorney's fees under R.C.
{¶ 4} Appellant presents two assignments of error for our review.
{¶ 5} "I. The trial court prejudicially erred to the detriment of the appellant by granting appellee's motion for an award of attorney's fees pursuant to R.C.
{¶ 6} "II. The trial court erred when it granted appellee's motion for attorney's fees without holding a hearing."
{¶ 7} A trial court may award attorney's fees for frivolous conduct where: (1) a court exercises its "inherent power to do all things necessary to the administration of justice and to protect [its] own powers and processes;" (2) there is a violation of Rule 11 of the Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure; and (3) Section
{¶ 8} R.C.
{¶ 9} "(a) * * * obviously serves merely to harass or maliciously injure another party to the civil action; [or]
{¶ 10} "(b) * * * is not warranted under existing law and cannot be supported by a good faith argument for an extension, modification, or reversal of existing law." R.C.
{¶ 11} This section provides that "the trial court may award attorney['s] fees only after conducting a hearing that allows the parties to present evidence in support or opposition to such award." Shaffer v.Mease (1991),
{¶ 12} In the instant case, the trial court granted Appellee's motion for attorney's fees without conducting the hearing mandated by statute. We find that the failure to comply with the procedural mandates of R.C.
{¶ 13} We are, therefore, compelled to reverse this matter so that the trial court may hold a hearing pursuant to R.C.
Judgment reversed and remanded.
This cause is reversed and remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
It is, therefore, considered that said appellant recover of said appellee costs herein.
It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this court directing the common pleas court to carry this judgment into execution.
A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.
Patricia A. Blackmon, P.J., and Anthony O. Calabrese, Jr., J., concur.
"Failure of Performance: If Seller fails to perform any of Seller's obligations under this Agreement, in addition to any other remedies in law or in equity available to Buyer, Buyer shall be entitled to the immediate return of all money deposited in escrow or with Seller plus (i) any amount paid by Buyer pursuant to Section 12(B) hereof, and (ii) an amount equal to the costs chargeable to Seller pursuant to Section 12(a) hereof. If Buyer fails to perform any of Buyer's obligations under this Agreement, Seller shall retain all money deposited in escrow or with Seller, as stipulated liquidated damages, and both parties shall be relieved of all further liability hereunder."
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2003 Ohio 7073, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/winkler-bldg-v-fairview-sh-center-unpublished-decision-12-24-2003-ohioctapp-2003.