Hassan v. Moorhead

275 N.E.2d 876, 28 Ohio App. 2d 201, 57 Ohio Op. 2d 307, 1971 Ohio App. LEXIS 405
CourtOhio Court of Appeals
DecidedDecember 1, 1971
Docket762
StatusPublished

This text of 275 N.E.2d 876 (Hassan v. Moorhead) 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
Hassan v. Moorhead, 275 N.E.2d 876, 28 Ohio App. 2d 201, 57 Ohio Op. 2d 307, 1971 Ohio App. LEXIS 405 (Ohio Ct. App. 1971).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Appellants, plaintiffs in the trial court, have filed two notices of appeal, one on July 6, 1971, from *202 a "judgment herein entered on June 14, 1971,” and the other on July 12, 1971, from a "judgment herein entered on June 21, 1971.”

The “judgment” entered on June 14, 1971, is an order overruling plaintiffs’ motion to strike defendant’s motion for summary judgment from the file or, in the alternative, to take testimony. That order is an interlocutory order, is not a final appealable order, and is not reviewable in the absence of a final appealable order.

The "judgment” entered on June 21, 1971, reads in its entirety as follows:

"This cause was submitted to the Court, on Motions for Summary Judgment, and the affidavits filed therewith.
"Upon due consideration, the Court finds that the Motions for Summary Judgment should be, and they hereby are ordered sustained as to all defendants, to-wit: J. M. Moorhead; William R. Bell; R. J. Reed; and Wolverine Insurance Co.”

The record discloses no other purported entry of judgment.

The order of June 21st constitutes no more a judgment than would a jury verdict or any other court finding, standing alone. It is merely a ruling that the defendants are entitled to judgment and is not a final appealable order. Dowling v. Jensen, 28 Ill. App. 2d 174, 171 N. E. 2d 107; Connolly v. Great Basin Insurance Company, 5 Ariz. App. 117, 423 P. 2d 732.

Neither the order of June 14th nor that of June 21st being appealable, the appeals purported to be perfected thereby must be dismissed.

Appeals dismissed.

Younger, P. J., GUERNSEY and Cole, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Connolly v. Great Basin Insurance Company
423 P.2d 732 (Court of Appeals of Arizona, 1967)
Dowling v. Jensen
171 N.E.2d 107 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1960)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
275 N.E.2d 876, 28 Ohio App. 2d 201, 57 Ohio Op. 2d 307, 1971 Ohio App. LEXIS 405, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hassan-v-moorhead-ohioctapp-1971.