Legal Opinion
Calypso Asset Mgt., L.L.C. v. 180 Indus., L.L.C.
Ohio Court of Appeals
Decided December 31, 2018No. 18AP-53PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtKlatt, J.
{¶ 1} Defendant-appellant, 180 Industrial, LLC ("180"), appeals a judgment of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas that (1) awarded 180 attorney fees and costs under a fee-shifting provision in 180's contract with plaintiff-appellee, Calypso Asset Management, LLC ("CAM"), and (2) denied 180's motion for sanctions under R.C. 2323.51. For the following reasons, we reverse and remand this matter to the trial court.
{¶ 2} This case arises from a failed business transaction between 180 and CAM. CAM intended to purchase Calypso Distribution Services, Ltd. ("Calypso"), a logistics company, and…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Blakemore v. BlakemoreOhio Supreme Court · 1983
- Bittner v. Tri-County Toyota, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1991
- Mauzy v. Kelly Services, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1996
- ABM Farms, Inc. v. WoodsOhio Supreme Court · 1998
- Lucarell v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2018
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Bales v. Forest River, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2019
- Calypso Asset Mgt., L.L.C. v. 180 Indus., L.L.C.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2021
- Speigel v. IanniOhio Court of Appeals · 2023
- Cruz v. English Nanny & Governess SchoolOhio Court of Appeals · 2020
- Shertok v. Wallace Group Gen. Dentistry For Today, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2020
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.