Kinnett v. Corporate Document Solutions, Inc., 2019 Ohio 2025

Plaintiff Megan Kinnett (age 15 at the time) alleged repeated sexual assaults by Harold Percy Jr., her supervisor at Corporate Document Solutions, Inc. (CDS), occurring after workplace events and on CDS premises; she alleged physical injuries and permanent pelvic damage.
Kinnett sued CDS and Harold and Mary Percy asserting battery, sexual harassment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, fraud, civil conspiracy, vicarious liability, and sought compensatory and punitive damages; suit was stayed pending criminal proceedings against Harold Percy.
Settlement negotiations occurred between CDS’s counsel (Hawkins and Stegeman) and Kinnett’s counsel (Frederick Johnson). Kinnett’s counsel made offers culminating in a $65,000 offer on December 23, 2017.
Counsel disagreed about January 8–9, 2018 events: CDS’s lawyers testified Johnson confirmed the $65,000 settlement and CDS accepted shortly thereafter; Johnson testified Kinnett had revoked his settlement authority by January 5 and withdrew the $65,000 offer.
The trial court found CDS’s counsel credible, concluded there was a valid offer for $65,000 that CDS accepted on January 9, 2018, and ordered CDS to deposit $65,000 to effectuate the release; Kinnett appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether CDS’s communications after Dec 23 constituted a counteroffer that terminated the $65,000 offer	Kinnett: CDS’s remarks (e.g., “closer to $50,000”) were counteroffers that extinguished the $65,000 offer	CDS: Those communications were continued negotiations, not rejections; $65,000 remained open and was later accepted	Court found negotiations did not reject the $65,000 offer; acceptance was effective (factual finding)
Whether Johnson had authority to bind Kinnett when $65,000 was confirmed	Kinnett: She revoked counsel’s authority by Jan 5; settlement therefore invalid	CDS: Johnson never notified CDS of any revocation before acceptance; his words and actions showed authority	Court found Johnson’s testimony not credible and held counsel had authority when CDS accepted (factual finding)
Whether all essential terms existed to form an enforceable settlement	Kinnett: Parties had not agreed on secondary terms (payment method, confidentiality), so no meeting of minds	CDS: Essential terms—price and release—were agreed; secondary terms could be resolved later	Court held essential terms (amount and release) were agreed; enforceable settlement (legal review)
Standard of review for enforcement of settlement	N/A (argument about deference)	N/A	Court applied de novo review to legal questions and deferential review to factual/credibility findings; affirmed enforcement

Infinite Sec. Solutions, L.L.C. v. Karam Properties, II, Ltd., 143 Ohio St.3d 346, 2015-Ohio-1101, 37 N.E.3d 1211 (Ohio 2015) (Ohio public policy favoring settlement enforcement)
Kostelnik v. Helper, 96 Ohio St.3d 1, 2002-Ohio-2985, 770 N.E.2d 58 (contract elements required for settlement enforcement)
Seasons Coal Co., Inc. v. Cleveland, 10 Ohio St.3d 77, 1984-Ohio-545, 461 N.E.2d 1273 (deference to trial court credibility findings)
State v. DeHass, 10 Ohio St.2d 230, 1967, 227 N.E.2d 212 (trial court best positioned to judge witness credibility)
Mr. Mark Corp. v. Rush, Inc., 11 Ohio App.3d 167, 1983, 464 N.E.2d 586 (less essential contract terms can be resolved later or by court)
Bromley v. Seme, 3 N.E.3d 1254 (11th Dist. 2013) (client bound by attorney settlement within authority)
Argo Plastic Prods. Co. v. Cleveland, 15 Ohio St.3d 389, 1984, 474 N.E.2d 328 (misconduct by attorney in exceeding authority imputed to client)