Tennant v. Gallick
2014 Ohio 477
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Tennant sued attorney Donald Gallick in Akron Municipal Court (Small Claims) alleging he contracted to file an Ohio Supreme Court appeal for her son by September 14, 2011 and failed to do so, seeking refund of fees paid (~$3,275; court awarded $3,000 limit).
- Complaint served; hearing set for October 13, 2012; notice warned that failure to appear could result in default judgment. Gallick signed certified mail receipt.
- Gallick filed a motion to dismiss and later conceded he filed the Supreme Court filing late and unsuccessfully sought delayed appeal; he did not appear at the small‑claims hearing.
- Tennant presented a recorded phone call, a written fee agreement with the son, payment records, and a power of attorney from her son authorizing her to act on his behalf; magistrate found Tennant had authority to sue and that Gallick breached the agreement.
- Magistrate awarded default judgment for $3,000 (jurisdictional limit) plus costs and interest; trial court adopted the magistrate’s decision. Gallick appealed, asserting errors including lack of standing, due process, need for expert malpractice testimony, and conflict between oral and written contracts.
- Appellate court affirmed, holding small‑claims rules permit default judgment for failure to appear, Gallick’s objections lacked supporting evidence because he did not present at trial, and therefore his assignments of error failed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing to sue attorney / third‑party suit | Tennant argued she had authority to sue based on an oral agreement and power of attorney from her son. | Gallick argued only a client may sue for malpractice and Tennant (non‑client) lacked standing. | Court held Tennant had authority (oral contract and/or POA) and rejected Gallick’s standing argument. |
| Default judgment for failure to appear | Tennant argued default appropriate given Gallick’s absence and proof presented. | Gallick argued pending motion to dismiss excused appearance / prevented default. | Court held small‑claims procedure permits default for failure to appear; pending motion did not preclude default. |
| Evidentiary sufficiency / malpractice proof | Tennant relied on recorded call, written agreement, payments, and POA to show breach contract and entitlement to refund. | Gallick argued malpractice claim required expert testimony and attorney‑client privilege issues would complicate a non‑client suit. | Court affirmed on default grounds; also noted Gallick presented no evidence to support objections; did not require expert testimony in this procedural posture. |
| Effect of written contract between attorney and client | Tennant contended oral agreement and POA supported her claim despite a written client contract with her son. | Gallick argued written client contract foreclosed oral quasi‑contract claim by Tennant. | Court found oral agreement (and POA) supported Tennant’s entitlement and/default judgment; did not adopt Gallick’s argument. |
Key Cases Cited
- (No officially reported authorities with reporter citations were provided in the opinion for inclusion under the required format.)