Professional Solutions Ins. Co. v. Novak L.L.P.

Citations

• 2020 Ohio 4829

Syllabus

Legal malpractice enforceability of attorney fees adhesion contract unequal bargaining power attorney fee-shifting provision Civ.R. 15(B) motion to amend pleadings Civ.R. 59 motion for new trial authentication of business records Civ.R. 49(B) narrative jury interrogatories jury interrogatories inconsistent with the verdict Civ.R. 48 juror misconduct R.C. 1776.36(C) Civ.R. 12(C) partner liability supersedeas bond Civ.R. 62. In a breach of contract claim, an attorney fee-shifting provision was unenforceable where the provision was incorporated into an adhesion contract that represented unequal bargaining power between the parties. Defendant-appellant/cross-appellee was not entitled to a motion to amend pleadings under Civ.R. 15(B) because the trial evidence could not sustain the proposed cause of action. Despite alleged misconduct or improper comments of plaintiff-appellee/cross-appellant's counsel, no prejudice resulted to the defendant-appellant/cross-appellee and competent, credible evidence supported the verdict. Therefore, the trial court did not err when it denied defendant-appellant/cross-appellee's motion for a mistrial and/or a new trial under Civ.R. 59. The trial court properly allowed the introduction of business records that were authenticated under Evid.R. 803(6). The trial court did not err when it rejected the use of narrative jury interrogatories on the basis that they were confusing. The alleged inconsistency between a juror's answer to the general verdict and jury interrogatories was moot since the general verdict reflected a decision of more than three-fourths of the jury. The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied a motion for new trial where there was no basis for defendant-appellant/cross-appellee's allegations of juror misconduct. A review of the insurance policy supported the trial judge's determination that the partners were not insureds under the terms of the policy. Accordingly, the partners were not personally liable for th