Polen v. Heaston
2016 Ohio 7508
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Decedent Robert C. Polen created the Polen Land Trust (Florida law) holding coal and oil/gas interests in OH and WV; beneficiaries are his grandchildren.
- Appellant Jon C. Polen sued family members in 2010 alleging mismanagement; parties entered an Agreed Entry on Sept. 19, 2012 allocating sale/lease duties and distributions (specific schedules and percentages).
- Paragraph 4 required marketing ~3,265 acres of coal interests with an independent coal expert selecting a broker; Paragraph 7 authorized Jon to market ~447.28 unleased oil/gas acres for lease within 120 days (with a possible 90‑day extension if negotiating) and set bonus/royalty splits.
- Jon moved to show cause (Dec. 2014), alleging six violations by Dean and others (failure to retain coal expert/broker; withholding Pleasants County WV lease info; tortious interference with oil/gas marketing; resignations to avoid dissolution; post‑resignation Chesapeake lease; improper distributions).
- Trial court found Dean in contempt only for failing to provide information about Pleasants County/WV leases (Paragraph 6) but denied the other claims; Jon appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Failure to retain independent coal expert/coal broker (¶4) | Jon: Dean failed to retain required expert/broker and thus violated the Agreed Entry | Dean: He led efforts, contacted experts, obtained offers (e.g., Rosebud) but market was poor and no unanimous acceptance occurred | Court: No contempt — Dean made good‑faith efforts; trial court not abused its discretion |
| Tortious/intentional interference with Jon's oil/gas marketing (¶7) | Jon: Dean obstructed leasing (contacting lessees, disputing ownership) during and after marketing period | Dean: Jon’s exclusive 120‑day marketing period expired without leases; Jon admitted no interference during that period; later objections were privileged or outside the contractual marketing window | Court: No contempt — no contract breach during the authorized marketing period; later conduct not proven to be wrongful interference |
| Dean and James resigned as co‑trustees to evade dissolution (¶8) | Jon: Resignations were strategic to avoid dissolution and distribution obligations | Dean: Resignations were lawful under trust and Florida law after counsel advised; beneficiaries failed to appoint successor; trust dissolved per law | Court: No contempt — Agreed Entry didn’t prohibit resignations and trustees had right to resign; resignation lawful |
| Execution of Chesapeake lease after resignations | Jon: Lease executed unilaterally post‑resignation included disputed acreage and yielded inadequate consideration | Dean: Contingency lease executed to protect interests in case court later found trust owned the acreage; nothing in Agreed Entry barred contingency leases | Court: No contempt — contingency lease permissible and occurred after Jon’s marketing period expired |
| Distribution of trust assets and applicability of ¶7(b) independent of ¶7(a) | Jon: Paragraph 7(b) distribution scheme applies independently and was violated when assets were dispersed | Dean: ¶7(b) applies to bonuses/royalties resulting from leases obtained under ¶7(a); trust distribution on dissolution follows trust terms and beneficiaries did not object to final accounting | Court: No contempt — ¶7(b) tied to leases from ¶7(a); distributions followed trust terms and were unchallenged |
Key Cases Cited
- Brown v. Executive 200, Inc., 64 Ohio St.2d 250 (civil‑contempt standard: clear and convincing evidence required)
- Cross v. Ledford, 161 Ohio St. 469 (definition of clear and convincing evidence)
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (abuse of discretion standard)
- State ex rel. Celebrezze v. Gibbs, 60 Ohio St.3d 69 (appellate review of contempt within discretion principles)
- Fred Siegel Co., L.P.A. v. Arter & Hadden, 85 Ohio St.3d 171 (elements and analysis for tortious interference with contract)
- A & B‑Abell Elevator Co. v. Columbus/Cent. Ohio Bldg. & Constr. Trades Council, 73 Ohio St.3d 1 (privilege/improperness factors in interference claims)