Bear v. Troyer
2016 Ohio 3363
Ohio Ct. App.2016Background
- Plaintiff Richard G. Bear paid $8,600 to Charlene Bear in 1990 for her alleged 1/4 interest in an 86-acre family farm, but no deed was executed or recorded, and title issues persisted until 2013.
- Bear occupied and used the property continuously (paid taxes for 25+ years, made improvements, built a cabin, installed fence/gate).
- After Charlene died in 2003, three of her daughters (the Cousins) later refused to execute quitclaim deeds in 2013; two other siblings did sign.
- Bear sued for declaratory judgment, alleging an oral sale enforceable by partial performance, and sought constructive trust, punitive damages, and attorney fees.
- After bench trial, the trial court found in Bear’s favor (part performance removed the contract from the statute of frauds), imposed a constructive trust, and awarded sanctions/attorney fees under Civ. R. 11 (against opposing counsel) and R.C. 2323.51 (against the Cousins); the appellate court affirmed most rulings but vacated the Civ. R. 11 sanction against opposing counsel.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether oral agreement for sale of land was enforceable under partial performance (statute of frauds) | Bear: paid consideration, took continuous possession, paid taxes, made improvements — satisfies part performance | Cousins: oral agreement barred by statute of frauds; no written memorandum | Held: Court found sufficient part performance (possession, payment, improvements, tax payments); declaratory judgment for Bear affirmed |
| Whether constructive trust could be imposed given statute of frauds concerns | Bear: equitable relief appropriate to effectuate oral sale | Cousins: oral sale unenforceable so constructive trust improper | Held: Moot after part-performance ruling; constructive trust sustained as issue resolved in Bear’s favor |
| Admissibility of Attorney Hillyer’s 2013 letter (offer/settlement vs. admission) | Bear: letter admissible as admission against interest | Cousins: letter was settlement communication and inadmissible | Held: Court admitted the letter (treated as admission); any error was harmless given other evidence |
| Sanctions / attorney-fee awards (Civ. R. 11 and R.C. 2323.51) | Bear: counsel and Cousins acted frivolously; seek full fees ($126k+) and expenses | Cousins & counsel: pleadings were supported and not filed for delay; counsel relied on client representations | Held: R.C. 2323.51 fees against Cousins affirmed ($8,304.83); Civ. R. 11 sanction against Attorney Hillyer vacated (no willful violation); overall fee award reduced and trial court did not abuse discretion in amount awarded or refusal to award all requested expenses |
Key Cases Cited
- Delfino v. Paul Davies Chevrolet, Inc., 2 Ohio St.2d 282 (partial performance can remove contract from operation of statute of frauds)
- Tier v. Singrey, 154 Ohio St. 521 (part-performance elements: possession, payment, improvements)
- Shimko v. Marks, 91 Ohio App.3d 458 (statute of frauds requires writing for sale of land)
- Ceol v. Zion Indus., Inc., 81 Ohio App.3d 286 (standards for Civ. R. 11 sanctions)
- Tomb & Assoc., Inc. v. Wagner, 82 Ohio App.3d 363 (attorney may rely on client’s recitation of facts unless plainly devoid of truth)