Background

• Unick and Kovachik formed Pro-Cision, Inc. in spring 1999 with 50/50 ownership and personal collateral; Unick later sold his stock to Pro-Cision under a February 7, 2000 Stock Sale Agreement requiring installments and a final lump sum.
• The Stock Sale Agreement provided indemnities for Pro-Cision’s liabilities and allowed reimbursement of costs and attorney’s fees upon default or in enforcement actions.
• Pro-Cision defaulted on payments and did not remove Unick from a joint bank loan, leading Unick to incur substantial attorney fees and pursue breach of contract and related claims.
• Unick retained HHM and later Eicher; he incurred substantial fees across contract, bankruptcy, malpractice, and related proceedings, seeking recovery from Pro-Cision.
• A magistrate and trial court ultimately awarded only $9,170 on a breach-of-contract claim, and denied the remainder of Unick’s requested attorney fees due to lack of evidence of hours worked and hourly rates; the trial court’s decision was affirmed on appeal.
• The sole issue on appeal was whether Unick was required to prove actual time expended and hourly rates to recover attorney fees under a contractual fee-shifting provision.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• Stonehenge Land Co. v. Beazer Homes Invests., L.L.C., 177 Ohio App.3d 7 (Ohio App.3d 2008) (trial court must assess reasonableness with supported evidence; hourly rate evidence required)
• Nottingdale Homeowner's Assn. v. Darby, 33 Ohio St.3d 32 (1987) (fee awards must be fair, just, and reasonable; consider circumstances)
• Bittner v. Tri-County Toyota, Inc., 58 Ohio St.3d 143 (1991) (lodestar as starting point; abuse of discretion standard for fee awards)
• Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424 (1983) (establishes lodestar approach and hours billed; reasonableness standard)
• Blum v. Stenson, 465 U.S. 886 (1984) (requires evidence of prevailing market rates and reasonableness of rates)