Geisenfeld v. Geisenfeld

Citations

• 2026 Ohio 205

Syllabus

The trial court did not err in finding that appellant had fraudulently induced appellee to sign a settlement agreement. The agreement was ambiguous, and therefore the court was allowed to hear extrinsic evidence. Upon consideration of that evidence, the court found that appellant acted maliciously and violated her fiduciary duty by failing to disclose that the items for which appellee had bargained under the agreement were wholly meaningless, worthless, or non-existent. No error occurred in that regard. The court also did not abuse its discretion in awarding damages and attorney fees to appellee. Judgment affirmed.