Case Title: Zappitelli v. Miller

Citation: 2007-Ohio-3251

Docket Number: 20060540

State: ohio

Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Date: 2007-07-11T00:00:00Z

Document:
[Cite as Zappitelli v. Miller, 114 Ohio St.3d 102, 2007-Ohio-3251.] 
 
 
ZAPPITELLI ET AL., APPELLEES, v. MILLER ET AL., APPELLANTS. 
[Cite as Zappitelli v. Miller, 114 Ohio St.3d 102, 2007-Ohio-3251.] 
Torts — Attorney fees — In an action for fraud, compensatory damages award 
may include attorney fees only if punitive damages are awarded. 
(No. 2006-0540 — Submitted March 13, 2007 – Decided July 11, 2007.) 
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County, 
Case No. 85895, 2006-Ohio-279. 
__________________ 
PFEIFER, J. 
{¶ 1} In a civil trial, appellees, Nina and Anthony Zappitelli and Maria 
Capretta, won a jury award.  On appeal, the court of appeals determined that 
appellees were entitled to additional compensatory damages for attorney fees and 
remanded the cause for a determination of those fees.  We conclude that the court 
of appeals erred and reverse its decision. 
{¶ 2} The jury awarded Zappitelli aggregate damages of $134,500 for 
fraud, breach of contract, and negligence.  During deliberations, the jury had 
asked the court: “If we answer, no, to punitive damages, can we add money to 
compensatory damages to cover the attorney fees?”  The trial court instructed the 
jury that they could not. 
{¶ 3} On appeal, the court of appeals reversed the trial court, stating that 
this court “has recognized the long-standing principle of law that attorney fees are 
recoverable as compensatory damages in a tort action for fraud.”  Zappitelli v. 
Miller, Cuyahoga App. No. 85895, 2006-Ohio-279, ¶ 57.  To support this 
conclusion, the court of appeals quoted Roberts v. Mason (1859), 10 Ohio St. 278, 
paragraphs one and two of the syllabus.  Zappitelli, 2006-Ohio-279, at ¶ 57.  But 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO 
2 
these two paragraphs of syllabus law, when read together, support a conclusion 
opposite the one reached by the court of appeals. 
{¶ 4} “1.  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 * 
* *. 
{¶ 5} “2.  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.”  Roberts, paragraphs one and two 
of the syllabus. (Emphasis sic.) 
{¶ 6} It is clear to us that paragraph one of the syllabus states that in an 
action for tort involving fraud, a jury may award punitive damages.  It is equally 
clear that paragraph two of the syllabus states that when punitive damages are 
awarded, the award for compensatory damages may include attorney fees.  We do 
not see how it is possible to reach a different conclusion.  See Zoppo v. 
Homestead Ins. Co. (1994), 71 Ohio St.3d 552, 558, 644 N.E.2d 397 (“Attorney 
fees may be awarded as an element of compensatory damages where the jury finds 
that punitive damages are warranted”); Digital & Analog Design Corp. v. N. 
Supply Co. (1992), 63 Ohio St.3d 657, 590 N.E.2d 737 (“Without a finding of 
malice and the award of punitive damages, plaintiff cannot justify the award of 
attorney fees * * *.”) 
{¶ 7} We accepted jurisdiction only of proposition of law No. I.  
Zappitelli v. Miller, 110 Ohio St.3d 1437, 2006-Ohio-3862, 852 N.E.2d 186.  
Accordingly, we will not consider the other issues raised by appellant Karen J. 
Miller and her counsel. 
Judgment reversed. 
January Term, 2007 
3 
 
MOYER, C.J., LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’CONNOR, O’DONNELL, LANZINGER 
and CUPP, JJ., concur. 
__________________ 
Heben & Associates and Edward J. Heben Jr., for appellant. 
Dan Morell & Associates Co., L.P.A., Dan A. Morell Jr., Jason M. Panek, 
and Patricia A. Ekers, for appellee. 
______________________