frivolous conduct claim in Ohio

2024Ashtabula No. 2019-A-0041, 2019-Ohio-3442, ¶ 23 . {¶20} Under R.C. 2323.51(A)(2)(a)(ii), conduct is frivolous if “[i]t is not warranted under existing law, cannot be supported by a good faith argument for an extension, modification, or reversal of existing law, or cannot be supported by a good faith argument for the establishment of new law.” To evaluate a frivolous conduct claim, a court should consider whether a “reasonable attorney would have brought the action in light of existing law.” Bachman v. Durrani, 2021-Ohio-4073 , 180 N.E.3d 1246, ¶ 10 (1st Dist.), citing Riston at ¶ 31.

2017Delaware No. 06-CAE-10-0077, 2007-Ohio-4818 , 2007 WL 2713763 , ¶ 20. {¶ 17} The trial court held the frivolous conduct hearing August 20, 2015, and thereafter held in part, {¶ 18} "Spitz's conduct after December 16, 2014 met the criteria of frivolous conduct under R.C. 2323.51(A)(2) in that plaintiff's allegations or other factual contentions had no evidentiary support and were not likely to have evidentiary support particularly after the first deposition of Keith-Harper which failed to provide evidence supporting her claims." {¶ 19} It explained its decision in detail, stating why each of Ke

2013Clair & Kelsey, 94 Ohio St.3d 432, 436 , 763 N.E.2d 1169 (2002).

2013Clair & Kelsey, 94 Ohio St.3d 432, 436 , 763 N.E.2d 1169 (2002).

2013Lake No. 2004-L-082, 2005-Ohio-3405, ¶ 28 . {¶10} Initially, we note that, to the extent appellant challenges the factual determinations of the trial court supporting it’s decision, she has failed to include the transcript of the court’s frivolous conduct hearing for our review and, in its absence, we presume the regularity of the proceeding below.

2006McCoy v. McCoy (1993), 91 Ohio App.3d 570 , 583-84 , 632 N.E.2d 1358 . {¶ 53} In this case, we find major problems with the attorney fee award. {¶ 54} First, we find it remarkable that the attorney fees ballooned from $14,684.42 in attorneys fees and expenses at the time the action was dismissed, to $38,208.79, prior to the frivolous conduct hearing and again swelled to $42,815.79 through the end of the frivolous conduct hearing.

2006McCoy v. McCoy (1993), 91 Ohio App.3d 570 , 583-84 , 632 N.E.2d 1358 . {¶ 53} In this case, we find major problems with the attorney fee award. {¶ 54} First, we find it remarkable that the attorney fees ballooned from $14,684.42 in attorneys fees and expenses at the time the action was dismissed, to $38,208.79, prior to the frivolous conduct hearing and again swelled to $42,815.79 through the end of the frivolous conduct hearing.