Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 1319.02 (2026)

Enforcing commitment to pay attorneys' fees in commercial contract of indebtedness

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(A) As used in this section:

(1) "Contract of indebtedness" means a note, bond, mortgage, conditional sale contract, retail installment contract, lease, security agreement, or other written evidence of indebtedness, other than indebtedness incurred for purposes that are primarily personal, family, or household.

(2) "Commitment to pay attorneys' fees" means an obligation to pay attorneys' fees that arises in connection with the enforcement of a contract of indebtedness.

(3) "Maturity of the debt" includes maturity upon default or otherwise.

(B) If a contract of indebtedness includes a commitment to pay attorneys' fees, and if the contract is enforced through judicial proceedings or otherwise after maturity of the debt, a person that has the right to recover attorneys' fees under the commitment, at the option of that person, may recover attorneys' fees in accordance with the commitment, to the extent that the commitment is enforceable under divisions (C) and (D) of this section.

(C) A commitment to pay attorneys' fees is enforceable under this section only if the total amount owed on the contract of indebtedness at the time the contract was entered into exceeds one hundred thousand dollars.

(D) A commitment to pay attorneys' fees is enforceable only to the extent that it obligates payment of a reasonable amount. In determining the amount of attorneys' fees that is reasonable, all relevant factors shall be considered, including but not limited to, the nature of the services rendered, the time expended in rendering the services, the amount of money and the value of the property affected, and the professional skill and expertise of the attorney or attorneys rendering the services. Unless a court has been requested to make a determination of the amount of attorneys' fees that is reasonable and finds to the contrary by a preponderance of the evidence, the following are deemed reasonable amounts:

(1) If the commitment to pay attorneys' fees is based upon a specific percentage of the total principal, interest, and other charges owed on the contract of indebtedness, the percentage of the total so owed as specified in the contract of indebtedness;

(2) If the commitment to pay attorneys' fees is not based upon a specific percentage of the total principal, interest, and other charges owed on the contract of indebtedness, an amount equal to the attorneys' fees customarily charged by the attorney or attorneys rendering the services.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1954–2026 · leading case: Dawson Wise v. Zwicker & Assocs. PC, 780 F.3d 710 (6th Cir. 2015).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Dawson Wise v. Zwicker & Assocs. PC, 780 F.3d 710 (6th Cir. 2015). “Ohio Rev.Code § 1319.02(A)(1). 3 The General Assembly’s exclusion of “personal, family, or household” debt reinforces Ohio’s common-law rule that such provisions are not enforceable.”
Home S. & L. Co. of Youngstown v. Evergreen Land Dev., 2016-Ohio-1248. · cites it 5× “{¶103} Based upon the record, the magistrate found that the attorney fees incurred were reasonable as contemplated by R.C. 1319.02 (former R.C. 1301.21), - 31 - and making the deductions for the $21,000 credit by Cavitch, and $11,486.”
Mann v. Resolution T Co., L.L.C., 2014-Ohio-2451. · cites it 3× “In support of this proposition, the Manns make three arguments: (1) that the foreclosure decree in a prior case between the parties was not a final appealable order; (2) a pre-judgment taking of their sale proceeds in the foreclosure case pursuant to a contract claim for…”
City Loan & Sav. Co. v. Morrow, 122 N.E.2d 635 (Ohio Ct. App. 4th Dist. 1954). · cites it 4× “) The next succeeding section, Section 8561, General Code (Section 1319.02, Revised Code), provides that the instruments mentioned in Section 8560, General Code (Section 1319.”
Andersons, Inc. v. LaFarge North Am., Inc., 503 F. App'x 314 (6th Cir. 2012). “Andersons argued in its reply brief that it is also entitled to attorneys’ fees pursuant to Ohio Rev.Code § 1319.02 (recently transferred from § 1301.”
BND Rentals, Inc. v. Gayhart, 2026-Ohio-1998. · cites it 18× “He argued that the rental contract at issue was a “contract of indebtedness” as defined by 2 R.C. 1319.02, and because attorney fees are not permissible under the statute when the contract does not exceed $100,000.”
Fid. Tax, L.L.C. v. Hall, 2017-Ohio-5604. · cites it 3× “{¶ 14} R.C. 1319.02 allows for enforcing a commitment to pay attorney fees in commercial contracts of indebtedness as an exception to the American rule: If a contract of indebtedness includes a commitment to pay attorneys' fees, and if the contract is enforced through judicial…”
H.T. Hackney Co. v. NZR Retail of Toledo, Inc., No. 3:19-cv-00353, 2021 WL 964096 (N.D. Ohio Mar. 15, 2021). · cites it 3× “Defendants appear to argue that Ohio Revised Code § 1319.02 limits the attorney’s fees Hackney can recover here.”
Frederick D. Harris & Bernice R. Harris, No. 18-16598 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio Jan. 21, 2022). “Code § 1319.02. A separate section of the code defines a consumer transaction as “a sale, lease, assignment, [etc.”
Huntington Natl. Bank v. Stanley Miller Constr. Co., 2013-Ohio-5878. · cites it 2× “The complaint also alleged that pursuant to R.C. 1319.02, Lender was entitled to recover its reasonable attorney fees in connection with the enforcement and collection on the Note and Guarantees.”
Dodeka, L.L.C. v. Keith, 2017-Ohio-7449. “No statutory exception has been recognized concerning a civil action to collect on a defaulted debt, unless the debt is greater than $10,000 (see R.C. 1319.02(A)(1)); under Ohio common law, a contract provision which shifts the obligation to pay attorney fees is unenforceable.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 1319.02(A)(1): 3 cases
Dawson Wise v. Zwicker & Assocs. PC, 780 F.3d 710 (6th Cir. 2015). “Ohio Rev.Code § 1319.02(A)(1). 3 The General Assembly’s exclusion of “personal, family, or household” debt reinforces Ohio’s common-law rule that such provisions are not enforceable.”
BND Rentals, Inc. v. Gayhart, 2026-Ohio-1998. “He argued that the rental contract at issue was a “contract of indebtedness” as defined by 2 R.C. 1319.02, and because attorney fees are not permissible under the statute when the contract does not exceed $100,000.”
Dodeka, L.L.C. v. Keith, 2017-Ohio-7449. “No statutory exception has been recognized concerning a civil action to collect on a defaulted debt, unless the debt is greater than $10,000 (see R.C. 1319.02(A)(1)); under Ohio common law, a contract provision which shifts the obligation to pay attorney fees is unenforceable.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 1319.02(B): 1 case
BND Rentals, Inc. v. Gayhart, 2026-Ohio-1998. “He argued that the rental contract at issue was a “contract of indebtedness” as defined by 2 R.C. 1319.02, and because attorney fees are not permissible under the statute when the contract does not exceed $100,000.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 1319.02(C): 1 case
BND Rentals, Inc. v. Gayhart, 2026-Ohio-1998. “He argued that the rental contract at issue was a “contract of indebtedness” as defined by 2 R.C. 1319.02, and because attorney fees are not permissible under the statute when the contract does not exceed $100,000.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 1319.02(D): 1 case
Home S. & L. Co. of Youngstown v. Evergreen Land Dev., 2016-Ohio-1248. “{¶103} Based upon the record, the magistrate found that the attorney fees incurred were reasonable as contemplated by R.C. 1319.02 (former R.C. 1301.21), - 31 - and making the deductions for the $21,000 credit by Cavitch, and $11,486.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 1319.02(D)(2): 1 case
Home S. & L. Co. of Youngstown v. Evergreen Land Dev., 2016-Ohio-1248. “{¶103} Based upon the record, the magistrate found that the attorney fees incurred were reasonable as contemplated by R.C. 1319.02 (former R.C. 1301.21), - 31 - and making the deductions for the $21,000 credit by Cavitch, and $11,486.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.