Bristol Township Board of Trusteesv.Haney

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eleventh District, Trumbull CountyAug 20, 2010
No. 2010-T-0084 (Ohio Ct. App. 2010)

No. 2010-T-0084.

August 20, 2010.

Civil Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas, Case No. 2009 CV 01733.

Appeal dismissed.

Mark S. Finamore, (for Plaintiff-Appellee).

Frank R. Bodor, (for Defendants-Appellants).


MEMORANDUM OPINION


{¶ 1} On June 30, 2010, appellants, James Haney and Tamara Haney, filed a notice of appeal from a June 11, 2010 judgment entry of the Trumbull County Court of Common Pleas.

{¶ 2} On June 29, 2009, appellee, Bristol Township Board of Trustees, filed with the trial court a complaint for declaratory judgment against appellants. On April 15, 2010, appellants filed a motion for summary judgment. The trial court denied appellants' motion on June 11, 2010. Appellants filed the instant appeal from that decision.

{¶ 3} Section 3(B)( 2), Article IV of the Ohio Constitution limits the jurisdiction of an appellate court to the review of final judgments of lower courts. Germ v. Fuerst, 11th Dist. No. 2003-L-116, 2003-Ohio-6241, ¶ 3. In order for a judgment to be final and appealable, the requirements of R.C. 2505.02 and Civ. R. 54(B), if applicable, must be satisfied. See Alden v. Kovar, 11th Dist. Nos. 2006-T-0050 and 2006-T-0051, 2006 WL 1816263, at ¶ 5, citing to Chef Italiano Corp. v. Kent State Univ. (1989), 44 Ohio St.3d 86, 88.

{¶ 4} Pursuant to R.C. 2505.02(B), there are five categories of a "final order," and if a trial court's judgment satisfies any of them, it will be considered a "final order" which can be immediately appealed and reviewed by a court of appeals.

{¶ 5} Here, appellants have attempted to appeal the denial of a motion for summary judgment. The trial court's entry does not fit within any of the categories of R.C. 2505.02. "An order denying a motion for summary judgment is not a final appealable order." State ex rel. Overmeyer v. Walinski (1966), 8 Ohio St.2d 23. Moreover, the denial of summary judgment is always reviewable on an appeal from a subsequent final judgment. Sagenich v. Erie Ins. Group (Dec. 12, 2003), 11th Dist. No. 2003-T-0144, 2003 WL 22952586, at ¶ 3. Furthermore, the mere inclusion of Civ. R. 54(B) language into a non-final order does not transform it into a final and appealable order. Sason v. Shepherd, 11th Dist. No. 2007-L-199, 2008-Ohio-173, at ¶ 3.

{¶ 6} Based upon the foregoing analysis, the judgment of the trial court is not a final appealable order. Appellants will have a meaningful and effective remedy by way of an appeal once a final judgment is reached as to all claims and parties when the case is decided and/or dismissed. See Johnson v. Warren Police Dept., 11th Dist. No. 2005-T-0117, 2005-Ohio-6904, at ¶ 14. Furthermore, the addition of Civ. R. 54(B) language in the June 11 entry does not transform that entry into a final appealable order. Thus, this court is without jurisdiction to consider this appeal, and this appeal is hereby, sua sponte, dismissed for lack of a final appealable order.

{¶ 7} Appeal dismissed.

CYNTHIA WESTCOTT RICE, J., TIMOTHY P. CANNON, J., concur.