Dickson & Campbell, L.L.C. v. Marshall
2017 Ohio 1032
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Campbell represented Bessie Tyus in a nursing-home negligence matter; Marshall later was retained by Tyus’s daughter and took over the case under a one-third contingent-fee agreement.
- Campbell asserted an attorney charging lien and later sought quantum meruit for work he performed before discharge; Campbell claimed $50,443.70 (fees plus costs).
- Marshall settled the Tyus case for $150,000 shortly after taking over, deposited proceeds into a trust per court instruction, then disbursed funds while a dispute over fees remained unresolved; she was later held in contempt and disciplined by the Ohio Supreme Court.
- Campbell sued Marshall for fraud, theft/conversion/embezzlement, and other torts; Marshall counterclaimed. The trial court granted summary judgment for Campbell on theft/conversion/embezzlement and fraud and awarded $50,443.70; Marshall appealed.
- The appellate court affirmed summary judgment for Campbell on theft/conversion/embezzlement, reversed the fraud judgment (holding Marshall was entitled to judgment on that claim), and remanded for a hearing to determine any quantum meruit recovery to Campbell, because the prior award was made without adequate hearing or consideration of the totality of circumstances.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Campbell proved fraud by Marshall | Marshall knowingly misrepresented or concealed material facts causing Campbell to rely and be injured | No evidence Marshall made a knowing misrepresentation to Campbell or intended to mislead him | Reversed: summary judgment for Campbell on fraud improper; Marshall entitled to judgment on fraud claim |
| Whether Campbell proved theft/conversion/embezzlement | Marshall wrongfully withheld settlement funds and thereby converted/stole them | Marshall disputed the characterization or amount | Affirmed: summary judgment for Campbell on theft/conversion/embezzlement proper |
| Whether Marshall’s counterclaims raised genuine issues | Counterclaims had merit and precluded summary judgment | Marshall failed to produce evidence creating genuine factual disputes | Affirmed: summary judgment for Campbell on all counterclaims proper |
| Whether the trial court properly awarded $50,443.70 as quantum meruit without hearing | Campbell entitled to quantum meruit for services rendered prior to discharge; prior proceedings established amount | Marshall was denied an opportunity to be heard and the court failed to consider totality of circumstances required by quantum meruit standards | Reversed in part: award vacated and case remanded for a hearing to determine reasonable quantum meruit recovery |
Key Cases Cited
- Long v. Tokai Bank of California, 114 Ohio App.3d 116 (de novo standard for appellate review of summary judgment)
- Horton v. Harwick Chem. Corp., 73 Ohio St.3d 679 (summary judgment standards)
- Gaines v. Preterm-Cleveland, Inc., 33 Ohio St.3d 54 (elements of actionable fraud)
- Joyce v. Gen. Motors Corp., 49 Ohio St.3d 93 (definition/elements of conversion)
- Reid, Johnson, Downes, Andrachik & Webster v. Lansberry, 68 Ohio St.3d 570 (quantum meruit recovery for discharged contingent-fee attorney; totality-of-circumstances test)
- Sonkin & Melena Co., L.P.A. v. Zaransky, 83 Ohio App.3d 169 (elements of quantum meruit)
- Goldauskas v. Elyria Foundry Co., 145 Ohio App.3d 490 (quantum meruit award reviewed for abuse of discretion)
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (abuse of discretion standard)
- Disciplinary Counsel v. Marshall, 142 Ohio St.3d 1 (Ohio Supreme Court discipline and order to make restitution)