J&H Reinforcing & Structural Erectors, Inc. v. Ohio School Facilities Comm.
2014 Ohio 1963
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- OSFC appeals a Court of Claims costs judgment favoring J&H Reinforcing & Structural Erectors following a complex contract dispute over a Wheelersburg school project.
- A referee ruled in favor of J&H on breach, equitable adjustment, and warranties, with OSFC prevailing on its counterclaims for breach and warranty; net damages for J&H were set to be offset against OSFC’s damages.
- Post-referee, objections were filed; the trial court adopted the referee’s decision and later computed prejudgment interest and costs, then held costs in abeyance pending fair assessment.
- The appellate court affirmed the underlying merits in J&H I; OSFC then challenged the trial court’s July 25, 2013 costs award (half of requested costs) and its authority to award costs while both parties had prevailed.
- OSFC argues four assignments of error related to jurisdiction, timing of costs, whether only one party should receive costs, and whether costs were properly authorized by statute or a Supreme Court rule.
- The Ohio Court of Claims ultimately overruled all assignments and affirmed the costs award to J&H by dividing costs evenly due to both parties prevailing and the ongoing appeals.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jurisdiction to decide costs during stay | OSFC contends the court lacked jurisdiction while remand/stay pending prejudgment interest. | J&H asserts the trial court retained jurisdiction; stay did not preclude ruling on costs. | Overruled; court retained jurisdiction despite stay. |
| Prematurity of costs award when both prevailed | OSFC claims costs awarded before final appealable order; premature. | Costs could be decided after objections were resolved; no prejudice. | Overruled; timing did not prejudice either party. |
| Both parties prevailed; one party awarded all costs | OSFC argues error in awarding costs to one party when both prevailed. | Court can allocate costs in light of mixed results; division allowed. | Overruled; court correctly split costs given both prevailed and ongoing appeals. |
| Authority for costs (statute or rule) | OSFC argues costs for transcripts and other items not authorized. | Arguments not raised below or timely; costs justified as fair. | Overruled; no plain error; issues not raised below forfeited; costs upheld. |
Key Cases Cited
- Koos v. Cent. Ohio Cellular, Inc., 94 Ohio App.3d 579 (8th Dist.1994) (trial court may decide costs pending appeal without remand)
- Kane v. Ford Motor Co., 17 Ohio App.3d 111 (8th Dist.1984) (trial court may award costs without waiting for appeal resolution)
- State ex rel. Neff v. Corrigan, 75 Ohio St.3d 12 (1996) (trial court retains jurisdiction pending appellate review)
- Thompson v. Preferred Risk Mut. Ins. Co., 32 Ohio St.3d 340 (1998) (procedural error not raised below forfeits on appeal)