Strategy Group for Media, Inc. v. Lowden
2013 Ohio 1330
Ohio Ct. App.2013Background
- Strategy Group provided media services for Lowden's U.S. Senate campaign; no signed contract existed but invoices were sent and not paid.
- Campaign self-funding by Lowden and spouse; Lowden's substantial personal wealth and funding actions were central to issues.
- Invoices totaling about $204,435.28 were alleged owed and unpaid after trial.
- Trial court granted partial summary judgment on fraud and civil conspiracy; directed verdicts largely resolved claims; jury awarded Strategy Group $193,554.71.
- Appellate court affirmed judgment, holding no independent duty outside contract; fraud and unjust enrichment claims failed; attorney’s fees denied; certain evidence excluded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fraud and contract claims coexist? | Strategy Group asserts independent duty exists. | No independent duty; breach controls damages. | No independent duty; fraud rejected. |
| Directed verdict on breach of contract/unjust enrichment correct? | Evidence supports oral/personal payment promise. | No contract; no personal promise proved. | Directed verdict upheld; no implied contract. |
| Attorney’s fees recoverable? | Unsigned contract still governs; bad faith breach warrants fees. | American rule; no contract or bad faith shown. | Fees denied. |
| Exclusion of evidence proper? | Uithoven statements and FEC filings relevant to fraud/breach. | Statements and post-primary filings irrelevant/prejudicial. | Exclusion not abused. |
Key Cases Cited
- Dresher v. Burt, 75 Ohio St.3d 280 (Ohio 1996) (partner burden in Civil Rule 56; movant must show basis for summary judgment)
- Textron Fin. Corp. v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 115 Ohio App.3d 137 (9th Dist. 1996) (tort and contract damages must be separate for coexistence)
- Advanced Production Ctr., Inc. v. EMCO Maier Corp., 5th Dist. No.2003CAE03020, 2003–Ohio–6206 (5th Dist. 2003) (duty to disclose arises in fiduciary-like relationships)
- Blon v. Bank One, 35 Ohio St.3d 98 (Ohio 1988) (fiduciary/transaction distinctions; duties in disclosures)
- Westbrook v. Swiatek, 2011-Ohio-781 (5th Dist. 2011) (unjust enrichment limited where contract exists)