Benkosky v. Jarosick, Unpublished Decision (9-23-2004)

Ohio Court of Appeals

Benkosky v. Jarosick, Unpublished Decision (9-23-2004)

2004 Ohio 5026

CourtOhio Court of Appeals

DecidedSeptember 23, 2004

DocketCase No. 84097.

StatusUnpublished

This text of 2004 Ohio 5026 (Benkosky v. Jarosick, Unpublished Decision (9-23-2004)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Benkosky v. Jarosick, Unpublished Decision (9-23-2004), 2004 Ohio 5026 (Ohio Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

JOURNAL ENTRY and OPINION {¶ 1} Having reviewed the record, we find that the trial court's order of September 7, 2003 was not a final appealable order, as the issue of damages was left unresolved. State exrel. White v. Cuyahoga Metro. Hous. Auth. (1997),79 Ohio St.3d 543; Bautista v. Kolis (2001), 142 Ohio App.3d 169. In turn, the trial court's order denying appellant's motion for relief from judgment is also not a final appealable order. Vanest v.Pillsbury Co. (1997), 124 Ohio App.3d 525, 532. Therefore, we are without jurisdiction to hear this appeal. Section 3(B)(2), Article IV of the Ohio Constitution; see, also, R.C. 2501.02. For those reasons, appellees' motion to dismiss is granted.

{¶ 2} Appeal dismissed. It is ordered that appellees recover of appellant costs herein taxed. A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.

Celebrezze, Jr., P.J., and Karpinski, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

JOURNAL ENTRY and OPINION {¶ 1} Having reviewed the record, we find that the trial court's order of September 7, 2003 was not a final appealable order, as the issue of damages was left unresolved. State exrel. White v. Cuyahoga Metro. Hous. Auth. (1997),79 Ohio St.3d 543; Bautista v. Kolis (2001), 142 Ohio App.3d 169. In turn, the trial court's order denying appellant's motion for relief from judgment is also not a final appealable order. Vanest v.Pillsbury Co. (1997), 124 Ohio App.3d 525, 532. Therefore, we are without jurisdiction to hear this appeal. Section 3(B)(2), Article IV of the Ohio Constitution; see, also, R.C. 2501.02. For those reasons, appellees' motion to dismiss is granted.

{¶ 2} Appeal dismissed. It is ordered that appellees recover of appellant costs herein taxed. A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.

Celebrezze, Jr., P.J., and Karpinski, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2004 Ohio 5026, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/benkosky-v-jarosick-unpublished-decision-9-23-2004-ohioctapp-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack