Block v. Battaglia
This text of 2014 Ohio 5613 (Block v. Battaglia) 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.
Opinion
[Cite as Block v. Battaglia, 2014-Ohio-5613.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
GEAUGA COUNTY, OHIO
KIM M. BLOCK, : MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff-Appellee, : CASE NO. 2014-G-3235 - vs - :
GREG BATTAGLIA, :
Defendant-Appellant. :
Civil Appeal from the Chardon Municipal Court, Case No. 2013 CVE 585
Judgment: Appeal dismissed.
Dennis P. Levin, Landerbrook Corporate Center, 5910 Landerbrook Drive, #200, Cleveland, OH 44124 (For Plaintiff-Appellee).
Victor A. Mezacapa, III, Licata & Toerek, 6480 Rockside Woods Boulevard South, Suite 180, Independence, OH 44131 (For Defendant-Appellant).
DIANE V. GRENDELL, J.
{¶1} On October 10, 2014, appellant, Greg Battaglia, by and through counsel of
record, Victor A. Mezacapa, III, filed a notice of appeal from a September 8, 2014 entry
of the Chardon Municipal Court.
{¶2} App.R. 3(A) expressly states that the only jurisdictional requirement for the
filing of a valid appeal is to file a notice of appeal within the time allowed by App.R. 4.
The Supreme Court of Ohio has held that the failure to comply with the time
requirements of App.R. 4(A) is a jurisdictional defect, which is fatal to an appeal. In re
H.F., 120 Ohio St.3d 499, 2008-Ohio-6810, ¶ 17, citing State ex rel. Pendell v. Adams
Cty. Bd. of Elections, 40 Ohio St.3d 58, 60 (1988). {¶3} App.R. 4(A)(1) and (3) require a party to file a notice of appeal “within 30
days” of an entry that is final or, “if the clerk has not completed service of the order
[entry] within the three-day period prescribed by Civ.R. 58(B), * * * the date when the
clerk actually completes service.”
{¶4} Civ.R. 58(B) directs the clerk of courts to serve the parties with notice of
the judgment within three days of entering the judgment upon the journal.
{¶5} The record in this case clearly shows that the order from which appellant
wishes to appeal was entered on the court’s docket and filed on September 8, 2014.
Further, on September 8, 2014, the clerk of courts noted on the appearance docket that
copies were mailed to the parties.
{¶6} Thus, service was made on appellant within the three day period required
in Civ.R. 58(B), and the thirty day time period began to run on the date of entry of
judgment, September 8, 2014. Accordingly, the deadline for appellant to file his notice
of appeal was October 8, 2014, which was not a holiday or a weekend. This court is not
empowered to extend the time deadline in civil cases. Pendell, supra, at 60; see also
App.R. 14(B). Appellant untimely filed his notice of appeal on October 10, 2014.
{¶7} Based upon the foregoing, this appeal is dismissed, sua sponte, pursuant
to App.R. 4(A).
{¶8} Appeal dismissed.
CYNTHIA WESTCOTT RICE, J.,
THOMAS R. WRIGHT, J.,
concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2014 Ohio 5613, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/block-v-battaglia-ohioctapp-2014.