Thomas v. Murry, 109287
| Decision Date | 28 January 2021 |
| Docket Number | No. 109287,109287 |
| Citation | 2021 Ohio 206 |
| Parties | DONTAE THOMAS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. TIANA MURRY, ET AL., Defendants-Appellants. |
| Court | Ohio Court of Appeals |
Civil Appeal from the Cleveland Heights Municipal Court
Case No. CVF1800462
Appearances:
Cavitch, Familo & Durkin Co., L.P.A., and Robert A. West, Jr.; Pina Law, L.L.C., and Leslie Pina, for appellee.
Joanne Brown, for appellants.
{¶ 1} Defendants-appellants, Tiana Murry ("Tiana") and Steve Thomas ("Steve") (collectively the "appellants"), appeal from the trial court's denial of their motion for attorney fees and sanctions pursuant to Civ.R. 11 and R.C. 2323.51. Appellants raise the following assignments of error for review:
{¶ 2} After careful review of the record and relevant case law, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
{¶ 3} In April 2018, plaintiff-appellee, Dontae Thomas ("Dontae"), filed a civil action against his older brother, Steve, and Steve's wife, Tiana, in the Cleveland Heights Municipal Court. The original complaint set forth claims for defamation, malicious destruction of property, malicious prosecution, aiding and abetting malicious prosecution, trespassing, and damages.
{¶ 4} The claims brought against the appellants stemmed from a verbal and physical altercation that occurred during a family birthday party hosted at Dontae's home in April 2017. Dontae's complaint alleged that the altercation between Tiana and several guests occurred after Tiana "crashed" the party despite not being invited to the gathering "due to bad blood between her and many family members." (Original complaint at ¶ 6-7.) Once Tiana was escorted out of the party, Steve "proceeded to break all of the windows in Dontae Thomas's car, which was parked in the driveway." Id. at ¶ 11.
{¶ 5} Thereafter, Dontae filed a police report, "accusing Steve of intentionally breaking the [car] windows with a bat." Id. at 12. In turn, Tiana filed her own police report, "claiming that at least six individuals assaulted her at the birthday party." Id. at ¶ 13. Dontae alleged that Tiana fabricated the police report and that her false statements "caused [him] to be arrested and incarcerated for four days without an attorney or opportunity for bond." Id. at ¶ 16.
{¶ 6} During the discovery process, Dontae verified the authenticity of the responses he set forth in plaintiff's first set of combined answers to interrogatories, requests for admissions, and requests for production of documents. Within Dontae's responses, he denied numerous requests for admissions, including a request to admit that Tiana was invited to the birthday party by Dontae's wife, Deanna Thomas.
{¶ 7} In April 2019, Dontae filed an amended complaint, which removed Steve as a party and named Tiana as the sole defendant. In addition, the amended complaint removed the claims for malicious destruction of property and aiding in abetting in malicious prosecution, and reduced the requested damages from $15,000 to $12,000.
{¶ 8} Dontae was deposed approximately one day after the amended complaint was filed. Following his deposition, Dontae filed a second amended complaint in May 2019. The second amended complaint also named Tiana as the sole defendant and asserted claims for defamation and malicious prosecution.However, the second amended complaint removed the trespass claim against Tiana and reduced the requested damages to $10,000.
{¶ 9} In June 2019, all claims levied against Steve were formally dismissed without prejudice. Approximately one month later, Dontae filed a motion to dismiss all claims against Tiana pursuant to Civ.R. 41(A)(1)(a), which the trial court granted.
{¶ 10} Relevant to this appeal, the motion to dismiss stated as follows:
This Honorable Court requested that this case be settled, and plaintiff agrees. Although plaintiff contends that his case has merit, there has already been enough suffering. His relationship with his brother has been severely damaged, and pursuing complaints against his brother's wife would cause additional hardship for the family.
{¶ 11} In July 2019, appellants filed a joint motion for attorney fees and sanctions against counsel for Dontae, Leslie Pina ("attorney Pina"), and her employer, the Pina Law Firm, L.L.C., pursuant to Civ.R. 11 and R.C. 2323.51. Relying on certain statements made by Dontae during his deposition, the motion alleged that attorney Pina willfully filed unsupported and frivolous claims against the appellants without Dontae's authorization, stating:
At the time of filing, attorney Pina knew the case was devoid of any underlying facts necessary to support the claims. Attorney Pina filed the lawsuit to harass Steve Thomas and Tiana Tomas nee Murry and extort money from them.
{¶ 12} A hearing was held to address the motion in September 2019. At the hearing, Steve provided a brief recount of the incident at Dontae's home and expressed that he and Dontae "had a little misunderstanding about somethings," including the damages caused to Dontae's vehicle. Steve testified that, before the original complaint was filed in April 2018, he and Dontae "settled" the matter afterhe informed Dontae that he had nothing to do with the broken windows. Steve stated that he was "very upset" when he was served with the lawsuit because the claims levied against him were "bogus." (Tr. 29-30.) On cross-examination, Steve acknowledged that Dontae's car windows had been destroyed on the night of the incident and that Dontae believed Steve was responsible for the damage.
{¶ 13} Tiana briefly testified at the hearing, stating that she was invited to the birthday party by Dontae's wife. She further testified that she does not recall being asked to leave the party.
{¶ 14} Finally, attorney Pina was called by defense counsel to testify as if on cross-examination. Attorney Pina maintained that Dontae intentionally included Steve in the original complaint but conceded that Dontae struggled with whether to maintain the action against his brother. Attorney Pina testified that "the original complaint was everything my client wanted in the complaint." (Tr. 63.) However, she explained that Dontae became increasingly conflicted about continuing the action against Steve and was concerned he would "never speak to [his] brother again." (Tr. 42.) Eventually, attorney Pina amended the complaint after Dontae notified her that he settled the matter with Steve and wished to remove him from the case. Attorney Pina was questioned about several email correspondences with opposing counsel and admitted that she had advised opposing counsel that Dontae intended to remove Steve from the complaint as early as January 2019 — several months before Steve was dismissed from the case.
{¶ 15} Regarding Tiana, attorney Pina conceded that she eventually learned that Tiana "probably was invited" to the party held at Dontae's home. (Tr. 62.) When she filed the trespass claim, however, Dontae was not aware his wife had invited Tiana to his birthday party. Attorney Pina maintained that she made an independent investigation prior to filing the original complaint and that her independent investigation showed that she was justified in filing a lawsuit that included a trespass claim. She expressed that amendments to the original complaint were made as she gathered additional information.
{¶ 16} On direct examination, attorney Pina explained that she and Dontae executed an engagement letter in March 2018, based on Dontae's intention to pursue a civil action against both Steve and Tiana. Attorney Pina stated that she discussed the facts and allegations with Dontae prior to filing a complaint and that Dontae was aware an action was being filed against Steve and Tiana.
{¶ 17} Relevant to this appeal, attorney Pina testified that she personally read, reviewed, and filed the original complaint on Dontae's behalf with a good-faith belief that there were good grounds to support each of the asserted claims. She reiterated that she did not file the original complaint for the purpose of delay and that she investigated the relevant facts and law before initiating the action against Steve and Tiana.
{¶ 18} Attorney Pina was questioned further about the decision to remove Steve from the complaint. She reiterated that Dontae's decision to dismiss Steve from the action occurred after the original complaint was filed — "at some pointbetween April 11, 2018, and the filing of [the] first amended complaint on April 25, 2019." (Tr. 72.) Thereafter, between the filing of the first amended complaint and the filing of the second amended complaint, attorney Pina learned that Tiana had been invited to the birthday party by Dontae's wife. This information prompted attorney Pina to immediately remove the trespassing claim from the amended complaint.
{¶ 19} Attorney Pina was also questioned about certain discovery materials, including plaintiff's first set of answers to interrogatories, request for admissions, and requests for production of documents. Attorney Pina testified that she reviewed the posed discovery requests with Dontae, and that he signed a verification sheet on January 25, 2019. In relevant part, Dontae was asked to state with particularity the basis of his allegation in the complaint that "Steve Thomas proceeded to break all of the windows in Dontae Thomas's car, which was parked in the driveway." (Tr. 85.) Dontae's response to the posed interrogatory was "Steve admitted." (Tr. at id.)
{¶ 20} At the...
To continue reading
Request your trial