Greer v. GreerGreer v. Greer
Dated: October 21, 2019
CARR, Judge.
{¶1} Appellant Edward Greer appeals the judgment of the Lorain County Court of Common Pleas, Domestic Relations Division, awarding Appellee Pamela Greer attorney fees. This Court affirms.
I.
{¶2} The parties were divorced in 1984. The deсree of dissolution incorporated a separation agreement which provided that Mr. Greer would pay Ms. Greer child support. Ms. Greer was awarded the marital residence. In order to compensate Mr. Greer for his shаre of the equity in the
{¶3} The record reflects that orders аuthorizing the withholding of a portion of Ms. Greer‘s income were issued. In November 1989, the trial court issued an order stating that the “support order” was paid and terminated Ms. Greer‘s wage assignment.
{¶4} Over 30 years after the decree was journalized, in 2016, Mr. Greer filed a motion to show cause as to why Ms. Greer should not be held in contempt for failing to pay Mr. Greer the $6,355.00 ordered in the decree. Mr. Greer asserted in his affidavit that Ms. Greer failed to pay the money and that a written demand for the money was served upon Ms. Greer but she, nonetheless, did not pay the money owed.
{¶5} In February 2017, Mr. Greer filed a notice of voluntary dismissal pursuant to
{¶6} Mr. Greer filed objections to the magistrate‘s decision. The trial court held a hearing on the objections and thereafter issued a judgment entry overruling the objections. The trial court awarded Ms. Greer $1,090.00 in attorney fees.
{¶7} Mr. Greer has appealed raising three assignments of error.
II.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR I
THE TRIAL COURT ABUSED ITS DISCRETION WHEN IT ADOPTED THE FINDING OF THE MAGISTRATE THAT IT WAS EQUITABLE TO AWARD ATTORNEY FEES IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,090.00 TO THE APPELLEE PAMELA M. GREER.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR II
THE TRIAL COURT ABUSED ITS DISCRETION WHEN IT OVERRULED APPELLANT EDWARD B. GREER‘S OBJECTIONS TO THE MAGISTRATE‘S DECISION.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR III
THE TRIAL COURT ABUSED ITS DISCRETION WHEN THE TRIAL COURT FOUND THAT IT WAS EQUITABLE TO AWARD ATTORNEY FEES IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,090.00 TO THE APPELLEE PAMELA M. GREER.
{¶8} Mr. Greer raises three аssignments of error but has argued them all together in his brief. Accordingly, we will also address them together. Mr. Greer argues that Ms. Greer should not have been awarded attorney fees. Mr. Greer maintains that his conduct did not warrant the award, that Ms. Greer was not in financial need of the fees, and that Ms. Greer failed to submit any evidence of the reasonableness
{¶9}
In any post-decree motion or proceeding that arises out of an action for divorce, dissolution, legal separation, or annulment of marriage or an appeal of that motion or proceeding, the court may award all or part of reаsonable attorney‘s fees and litigation expenses to either party if the court finds the award equitable. In determining whether an award is equitable, the court may consider the parties’ income, the conduct of the parties, and any other relevant factors the court deems appropriate, but it may not consider the parties’ assets.
{¶10} “Because
{¶11} At the hearing, Ms. Greer testified that she paid the $6,355.00 ordered in the decree. She stated that, for part of the time she would personally make the payments, and, for part of the time the payments came out of her pаycheck. She asserted that she paid the money by November 1989. In support of her contention, she submitted a copy of the 1989 trial court entry which stated the “support order” was paid and the wage assignment was terminated.
{¶12} Ms. Greer indiсated that Mr. Greer did not contact her about the money until she received a letter from Mr. Greer‘s counsel in 2016. That letter informed Ms. Greer that Mr. Greer had not received the $6,355.00 and if she did not pay it within 30 days, an action would be filed against hеr. Ms. Greer read the letter and discarded the letter because she knew she had already paid the money.
{¶13} After Ms. Greer received the motion to show cause, she contacted Mr. Greer‘s attorney who asked if she had proof of her payment. She said she did not but would look into it. Ms. Greer then retained counsel in November 2016. Ms. Greer‘s counsel‘s fees were $200.00 per hour. Ms. Greer submitted documents evidencing the fees she was charged and what she paid. In addition, Ms. Grеer testified that she had already paid $500.00 and that she owed $640.00. Ms. Greer also paid $100.00 in court costs to file the motion for fees.
{¶14} Mr. Greer acknowledged that the decree did not provide for any spousal support and the only support that was to be paid was child support to Ms. Greer. Mr. Greer testified that in 2016, he went to the child support enforcement agency to see whether Ms. Greer had paid him the amount owed under the property division becausе he did not remember her doing so. Those records indicated that Ms. Greer had paid $1,883.18 in what is labeled support. Despite having evidence that Ms. Greer had in fact paid at least some money, Mr. Greer nonetheless sought to hold Ms. Greer in contempt and alleged that she failed to pay any of the $6,355.00. Mr. Greer admitted that he later learned he had in fact received the $6,355.00 and had “made a mistake.”
{¶15} With respect to their incomes, there was evidence submitted thаt, in 2016, Ms. Greer made around $60,000.00 per year and Mr. Greer made around $21,000.00 per year. In addition, in 2016, Mr. Greer received a tax refund of $1,195.00.
{¶16} After considering the record in this case, we cannot say that the trial court abused its discretion in awarding Ms.
{¶17} While Mr. Greer faults Ms. Greer for not responding to the letter his attorney sent to her prior to filing his mоtion to show cause, we note that the letter did not even request a response. Instead, it stated that an action will be filed if payment is not received within 30 days. Ms. Greer, however, had paid the money.
{¶18} Mr. Greer also alleges that Ms. Greer had to establish that she had a financial need for the fees. While the prior statute, former
{¶19} Finally, Mr. Greer argues that there was no evidence of the reasonableness of the fees, the time spent, or the hourly rate. He notes that no expert testified to support the rеasonableness of the fees.
{¶20} The trial court, in the entry ruling on the objections, stated that “the hourly rate/fee charged to [Ms. Greer] appears similar to fees customarily charged within this locality (Lorain County) for similar legal serviсes.” The trial court also observed that the local rules did not mandate expert testimony and concluded it was “equitable and reasonable as evidenced by the record to calculate an award of attorney fees based on the rate of $200.00 per hour and the amount of documented work performed by [Ms. Greer‘s] counsel. The trial court ultimately found that “the time spent on the matter * * * and the hourly rate charged * * * was fair and reasonable * * *.”
{¶21} Whilе this Court has not directly addressed whether expert testimony is required in situations involving attorney fees under
{¶22} Given the record before us, including the evidence presented and the amount of fees awarded, we conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that expert testimony was not required. Moreover, the trial court did not abusе its discretion in determining that both the time spent on the matter and the hourly rate were fair and reasonable.
{¶23} Mr. Greer‘s assignments of error are overruled.
III.
{¶24} Mr. Greer‘s assignments of error are overruled. The judgment of the Lorain County Court of Common Pleas, Domestic Relations Division is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
There were reasonable grounds for this appeal.
We order that a special mandate issue out of this Court, directing the Court of Common Pleas, County of Lorain, State of Ohio, to carry this judgment into execution. A certified copy of this journal entry shall constitute the mandate, pursuant tо App.R. 27.
Immediately upon the filing hereof, this document shall constitute the journal entry of judgment, and it shall be file stamped by the Clerk of the Court of Appeals at which time the period for review shall begin to run. App.R. 22(C). The Clerk of the Court of Aрpeals is instructed to mail a notice of entry of this judgment to the parties and to make a notation of the mailing in the docket, pursuant to App.R. 30.
Costs taxed to Appellant.
DONNA J. CARR
FOR THE COURT
TEODOSIO, P. J. CONCURS.
HENSAL, J. CONCURRING IN JUDGMENT ONLY.
{¶25} I would find that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding Ms. Greer attorney‘s fees basеd upon the conduct of Mr. Greer. I would note that this court has allowed for the finding of reasonable attorney fees without expert testimony in domestic relations court proceedings without the reliance on the local rule. See Kreger v. Kreger, 9th Dist. Lorain No. 91CA005073, 1991 WL 262883, *2 (Dec. 11, 1991); Payne v. Payne, 9th Dist. Summit No. 14248, 1989 WL 157213, *3 (Dec. 27, 1989); Cram v. Cram, 9th Dist. Medina No. 1746, 1989 WL 50705, *3 (May 10, 1989). As such, I concur with the decision to affirm the trial court‘s award of fees.
APPEARANCES:
MARK E. STEPHENSON, Attorney at Law, for Appellant.
WAYNE R. NICOL, Attorney at Law, for Appellee.