Court Opinion

ID: 9962122
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-22 19:10:05.955041+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:19:52.081946
License: Public Domain

[Cite as Homestead Interiors, Inc. v. Hines, 2024-Ohio-1527.]

                 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO
                           ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
                                 GEAUGA COUNTY

HOMESTEAD INTERIORS, INC.,                             CASE NO. 2023-G-0040

                 Plaintiff-Appellee,
                                                       Civil Appeal from the
        - vs -                                         Chardon Municipal Court

PHILLIP HINES,
                                                       Trial Court No. 2018 CVF 00577
                 Defendant-Appellant.

                                              OPINION

                                      Decided: April 22, 2024
                                    Judgment: Appeal dismissed

George L. Badovick, 13033 Ravenna Road, Chardon, OH 44024 (For Plaintiff-Appellee).

Glenn E. Forbes and Monica R. Zibbel, Forbes Law, LLC, 166 Main Street, Painesville,
OH 44077 (For Defendant-Appellant).

MATT LYNCH, J.

        {¶1}     Pending before this Court is the appeal filed by defendant-appellant, Phillip

Hines, from the September 28, 2023 Order of the Chardon Municipal Court. For the

following reasons, we dismiss the appeal for lack of a final order.

        {¶2}     The underlying proceedings began in 2018 when plaintiff-appellee,

Homestead Interiors, Inc., filed a small claims action against Hines in municipal court and

Hines filed counterclaims. All claims were tried before a magistrate who found in favor of

Homestead Interiors and against Hines. After a further hearing, the magistrate entered

an award of attorney fees in favor of Homestead Interiors pursuant to R.C. 1345.09(F).
      {¶3}   On May 23, 2022, the municipal court issued a couple of Orders. In one

Order, the court ruled: “Plaintiff [Homestead Interiors] is awarded a judgment in the

amount of $600.00, plus interest at 1.5% per month from February, 2018 and the costs

of this action. Further, a hearing on the issue of Attorney’s Fees was held on February

27, 2020, and the Court adopts the Magistrate’s Decision of April 17, 2020, and Plaintiff

is awarded fees in the amount of $7,850.00.”       In the other Order, the court ruled:

“Judgment for Plaintiff in the amount of $7,850.00 as and for attorney fees.”

      {¶4}   On October 17, 2022, this Court reversed the award of attorney fees

because neither the magistrate nor the court had made an express finding of

groundlessness and bad faith as required by R.C. 1345.09(F). Homestead Interiors, Inc.

v. Hines, 11th Dist. Geauga No. 2021-G-0024, 2022-Ohio-3700, ¶ 37.

      {¶5}   On November 10, 2022, the municipal court issued an Order finding that

“Defendant’s Counterclaim was groundless, and the Defendant maintained the action in

bad faith.” The court acknowledged that “Plaintiff remains entitled to the Judgment of

$7,850.00, as originally awarded under the CSPA,” but ruled: “In addition, a hearing will

be set forthwith before the Magistrate to determine whether additional attorney’s fees

should be awarded.”

      {¶6}   On November 18, 2022, Hines filed a Request for Findings of Fact and

Conclusions of Law.

      {¶7}   On December 9, 2022, Hines filed a Notice of Appeal from the November

10, 2022 Order.

      {¶8}   On February 13, 2023, this Court dismissed the appeal for lack of a final

order, i.e., the Request for Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law remained pending

                                            2

Case No. 2023-G-0040
and the issue of “whether additional attorney’s fees should be awarded” had not been

determined: “[T]he present appeal is dismissed for lack of a final order. The municipal

court may rule on the Request for Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Hines

may file a new appeal upon a determination regarding attorney fees.”           Homestead

Interiors, Inc. v. Hines, 11th Dist. Geauga No. 2022-G-0053, 2023-Ohio-413, ¶ 8.

       {¶9}   On February 24, 2023, Homestead Interiors filed a Motion to Re-Docket for

Award of Attorney Fees, asking the municipal court “to re-docket this case for the

determination of additional attorney fees as granted in the Court’s Order dated November

10, 2022.”

       {¶10} On September 28, 2023, the municipal court overruled the Request for

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law inasmuch as “they have been previously

delineated as part of this Court’s record.” The same Order also provided: “In addition, the

Plaintiff’s Motion to Re-Docket For Award of Attorney’s Fees filed February 23, 2023 is

granted and an Evidentiary Hearing has been previously scheduled and will proceed on

October 26, 2023 at 1:00 p.m.”

       {¶11} On October 18, 2023, Hines filed the present appeal. The hearing on

attorney fees scheduled for October 26 was cancelled.

       {¶12} In the prior appeal, this Court held that there was no final order while Hines’

Motion for Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law remained pending and the issue of

attorney fees remained unresolved. Following dismissal, the Motion for Findings of Fact

and Conclusions of Law was ruled upon but Hines, prematurely, filed the new appeal

while the issue of attorney fees remains unresolved. Homestead Interiors, 2023-Ohio-

413, at ¶ 8 (“Hines may file a new appeal upon a determination regarding attorney fees”).

                                             3

Case No. 2023-G-0040
       {¶13} As previously explained by this Court, a final order does not exist where a

possible award of additional attorney fees is contemplated. Id. at ¶ 7. “[I]t is well-settled

law that a judgment deferring final adjudication of a request for attorney fees is not a final

appealable order.” (Citation omitted.) Echols v. Echols, 2022-Ohio-1719, 190 N.E.3d

698, ¶ 26 (11th Dist.); DES Material & Supply Co., LLC v. Pincus, LLC, 11th Dist. Geauga

No. 2020-G-0255, 2020-Ohio-4360, ¶ 7 (“[u]ntil the attorney fees amount is determined *

* * this judgment is not a final appealable order”).

       {¶14} For the foregoing reasons, the present appeal is dismissed for lack of a final

order. Costs to be taxed against the appellant.

MARY JANE TRAPP, J.,

JOHN J. EKLUND, J.,

concur.

                                              4

Case No. 2023-G-0040