Cedric Woods v. Fitz Simon, Inc. d/b/a Bar 145 (mem. dec.)

• Court: Indiana Court of Appeals
• Decided: December 18, 2020
• Docket: 20A-CT-1269
• Status: Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM DECISION Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), FILED this Memorandum Decision shall not be Dec 18 2020, 8:21 am regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing CLERK Indiana Supreme Court Court of Appeals the defense of res judicata, collateral and Tax Court

estoppel, or the law of the case.

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEES Jason D. May Bryce H. Bennett, Jr. Edward D. Thomas Laura S. Reed Jason May Law Jaclyn M. Flint Indianapolis, Indiana Riley Bennett Egloff LLP Indianapolis, Indiana

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

Cedric Woods, December 18, 2020 Appellant-Plaintiff, Court of Appeals Case No. 20A-CT-1269 v. Appeal from the Allen Superior Court Fitz Simon, Inc. d/b/a Bar 145, The Honorable Nancy E. Boyer, Halo Media, Inc., Adams Radio Judge of Fort Wayne, LLC, John Doe Trial Court Cause No. #1 Juan Escarbro, John Doe #2 02D01-1709-CT-531 Phillip Johnson, and John Doe #3 Carlos Flores, Appellees-Defendants.

Najam, Judge.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 20A-CT-1269 | December 18, 2020 Page 1 of 4 Statement of the Case [1] Cedric Woods appeals the trial court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of

Fitz Simon, Inc. d/b/a Bar 145 (“the Bar”) on Woods’ complaint alleging,

among other claims, that the Bar’s negligence caused him personal injuries.

Woods presents a single issue for our review, namely, whether the trial court

erred when it entered summary judgment in favor of the Bar. However,

because we lack jurisdiction over this appeal, we do not reach its merits. We

dismiss.

Facts and Procedural History [2] Woods attended a party at the Bar to celebrate New Year’s Eve during the late

hours of December 31, 2016, and the early morning of January 1, 2017. Woods

had observed fights break out during the party, and he eventually decided to

leave the Bar. As Woods was leaving, he was physically assaulted by an

independent contractor who had been hired by the Bar to provide security for

the party.

[3] In 2017, Woods filed a complaint, which he amended in 2019. Woods’

amended complaint named as defendants the Bar; Halo Media, Inc.; Adams

Radio of Fort Wayne, LLC; John Doe #1 Juan Escarbro; John Doe #2 Phillip

Johnson; and John Doe #3 Carlos Flores. In January 2020, the Bar moved for

summary judgment on each of Woods’ claims against it. Following a hearing

on that motion, the trial court entered summary judgment in favor of the Bar.

This appeal ensued.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 20A-CT-1269 | December 18, 2020 Page 2 of 4 Discussion and Decision [4] We do not reach the merits of Woods’ appeal. As this Court explained in Bacon

v. Bacon, 877 N.E.2d 801, 804 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007), trans. denied:

The Indiana Court of Appeals has jurisdiction in all appeals from final judgments. Ind. Appellate Rule 5(A). A “final judgment” is one which “disposes of all claims as to all parties. . . .” App. R. 2(H)(1). A final judgment disposes of all issues as to all parties, thereby ending the particular case and leaving nothing for future determination. Georgos v. Jackson, 790 N.E.2d 448, 451 (Ind. 2003). Whether an order is a final judgment governs our . . . jurisdiction, and it can be raised at any time by any party or by the court itself. Id.

(Emphases added).

[5] Here, the trial court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the Bar did

not dispose of any issues as to the other defendants named in Woods’

complaint. And our review of the trial court’s chronological case summary

reveals that, while the trial court granted a motion to dismiss filed by Adams

Radio of Fort Wayne, LLC in July 2019, Woods’ claims against the remaining

defendants, including Halo Media, Inc., have yet to be resolved. Indeed, the

trial court has scheduled a status conference for January 12, 2021. By

definition, the order from which Woods appeals was not final because it did not

“dispose[] of all claims as to all parties.” App. R. 2(H)(1). Further, the trial

court’s order does not include the “magic language” from Trial Rule 56(C) that

would have converted its otherwise non-final order into a final order.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 20A-CT-1269 | December 18, 2020 Page 3 of 4 [6] As the trial court’s order was not a final judgment, Woods cannot appeal unless

the order is an appealable interlocutory order, which it is not. The order is not

appealable as of right under Appellate Rule 14(A), and Woods did not seek

certification of the order for a discretionary interlocutory appeal under

Appellate Rule 14(B). 1 See App. R. 14. Accordingly, we do not have

jurisdiction over this appeal.

[7] Dismissed without prejudice.

Riley, J., and Crone, J., concur.

1 In his notice of appeal, Woods purports to appeal from a final judgment.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 20A-CT-1269 | December 18, 2020 Page 4 of 4