Sadowski v. Monteleone

CourtOhio Court of Appeals
Writing for the CourtPER CURIAM; LYLE W. CASTLE, J., retired, of the Twelfth Appellate District, and WILLIAM H. VICTOR
CitationSadowski v. Monteleone, 591 N.E.2d 1304, 69 Ohio App.3d 815 (Ohio App. 1990)
Decision Date15 October 1990
Docket NumberNo. 59188,59188
PartiesSADOWSKI et al., Appellees, v. MONTELEONE, Appellant.

Syllabus by the Court

Expert witness fees are not taxable as costs.

Lawrence W. Corman, Cleveland, for appellees Janice Sadowski et al.

Patrick Roche, Cleveland, for appellant.

PER CURIAM.

In his sole assignment of error, appellant Vittorio Monteleone complains that the trial court erred in taxing as costs the expert witness fees of Dr. Li and Dr. Juguilon. We agree.

In Jones v. Pierson (1981), 2 Ohio App.3d 447, 2 OBR 542, 442 N.E.2d 791, the court set forth a two-step analysis for determining whether an expense is a taxable litigating expense or personal expense. Personal expenses are those expenses expended by a party in preparing a case for trial; necessary expenses are funds expended by a party as are necessary and vital to the litigation. Id. at 449, 2 OBR at 544-545, 442 N.E.2d at 794. Next, the court should decide whether a litigating expense should be taxed as a cost in the particular case at bar. While the court retains discretion in this regard, that discretion should be exercised to overrule a motion to tax litigating expenses only where the expense is unusual in type or amount which because of the prevailing part's conduct it is inequitable to assess against the nonprevailing party. Id.

Expert witness's fees have been specifically disallowed as a taxable cost against the nonprevailing party. See Moore v. General Motors Corp. (1985), 18 Ohio St.3d 259, 260-261, 18 OBR 314, 315-316, 480 N.E.2d 1101, 1102-1103; Gold v. Orr Felt Co. (1985), 21 Ohio App.3d 214, 21 OBR 228, 487 N.E.2d 347; Glover v. Massey (Jan. 11, 1990), Cuyahoga App. Nos. 56351 and 56802, unreported, 1990 WL 1328.

The appellant's assignment is well taken for the reason that expert witness fees are not properly taxable as costs.

The judgment of the trial court is reversed.

Judgment reversed.

DYKE, P.J., and LYLE W. CASTLE and WILLIAM H. VICTOR, JJ., concur.

LYLE W. CASTLE, J., retired, of the Twelfth Appellate District, and WILLIAM H. VICTOR, J., retired, of the Ninth Appellate District, sitting by assignment.

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
10 cases
  • Howard v. Wills
    • United States
    • Ohio Court of Appeals
    • September 11, 1991
    ...536 N.E.2d 56, 57; Gold v. Orr Felt Co. (1985), 21 Ohio App.3d 214, 216, 21 OBR 228, 230, 487 N.E.2d 347, 349; Sadowski v. Monteleone (1990), 69 Ohio App.3d 815, 591 N.E.2d 1304; see, also, McCormac, Ohio Civil Rules Practice (1991 Supp.) 191, Section 13.18. Accordingly, we hold that the ex......
  • Coleman v. Jagniszcak
    • United States
    • Ohio Court of Appeals
    • June 12, 1995
    ...90 Ohio App.3d 622, 624, 630 N.E.2d 68, 69; Shipman, supra, 70 Ohio App.3d at 335, 590 N.E.2d at 1386-1387; Sadowski v. Monteleone (1990), 69 Ohio App.3d 815, 591 N.E.2d 1304, syllabus. Thus, the $937.50 listed in items four and five of appellee's motion, representing professional fees paid......
  • Hagemeyer v. Sadowski
    • United States
    • Ohio Court of Appeals
    • February 26, 1993
    ...18 OBR at 315-316, 480 N.E.2d at 1102; Shipman, supra, 70 Ohio App.3d at 335, 590 N.E.2d at 1386; Sadowski v. Monteleone (1990), 69 Ohio App.3d 815, 816, 591 N.E.2d 1304, 1305. Appellant's second assignment of error is found well On consideration whereof, this court finds that substantial j......
  • Dennis Roberts and Cheri Roberts v. Bob's Mobile Home Sales and Service
    • United States
    • Ohio Court of Appeals
    • February 4, 1997
    ... ... Schneider (1995), 104 Ohio App.3d 398, 412; Miller ... v. Gustus (1993), 90 Ohio App.3d 622, 625; Hagemeyer ... v. Sadowski (1993), 86 Ohio App.3d 563, 567; ... Gnepper, supra, at 265; Vassil v. Able Pence ... Guard Rail, Inc. (1992), 81 Ohio App.3d 533, 541; ... Alamo Rent-A-Car, Inc. (1990), 70 Ohio App.3d 333, 335; ... Sadowski v. Monteleone (1990), 69 Ohio App.3d 815, ... 816; Dorko v. Woodruff (1988), 42 Ohio App.3d 13, ... 14; and Gold v. Orr Felt Co. (1985), 21 Ohio App.3d ... ...
  • Get Started for Free