Lacy v. Yan, Ashtabula Cty. Dog Warden
This text of 2022 Ohio 331 (Lacy v. Yan, Ashtabula Cty. Dog Warden) 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 Lacy v. Yan, Ashtabula Cty. Dog Warden, 2022-Ohio-331.]
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT ASHTABULA COUNTY
JAVONTE LACY, CASE NO. 2022-A-0001
Plaintiff-Appellant, Civil Appeal from the -v- Court of Common Pleas
DONNA YAN, ASHTABULA COUNTY DOG WARDEN Trial Court No. 2021 CV 00360 (OFFICIAL CAPACITY), et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Decided: February 7, 2022 Judgment: Appeal dismissed
Javonte Lacy, pro se, PID# A704-102, Lebanon Correctional Institution, 3791 State Route 63, Lebanon, OH 45036 (Plaintiff-Appellant).
Timothy T. Reid and Kendall A. Grodek, Mansour Gavin, LPA, North Point Tower, 1001 Lakeside Avenue, Suite 1400, Cleveland, OH 44114 (For Defendants-Appellees).
JOHN J. EKLUND, J.
{¶1} Appellant, Javonte Lacy, filed a pro se appeal from an Ashtabula County
Court of Common Pleas entry. Appellees filed a motion to dismiss the appeal as untimely,
and appellant filed a “Motion for Time Extension” to extend the time for filing the appeal.
{¶2} App.R. 3(A) expressly states that the only jurisdictional requirement for filing
a valid appeal is to file it within the time allowed by App.R. 4. The Supreme Court 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} “Subject to the provisions of App.R. 4(A)(3), a party who wishes to appeal
from an order that is final upon its entry shall file the notice of appeal required by App.R.
3 within 30 days of that entry.” See App.R. 4(A)(1). Civ.R. 58(B) directs the clerk of
courts to serve the parties with notice of the entry within three days of entering the
judgment upon the journal. If Civ.R. 58(B) service does not occur within three days, the
time to appeal does not begin to run until service is made and noted in the appearance
docket. Coles v. Lawyers Title Ins. Corp., 163 Ohio App.3d 659, 664, 2005-Ohio-5360.
{¶4} Here, the record shows the trial court issued its entry on November 12,
2021. The clerk of courts noted on the appearance docket that notice of the entry under
Civ.R. 58(B) was issued to the parties on November 16, 2021. Therefore, the time to
appeal began to run from November 16, 2021. The deadline for appellant to file his notice
of appeal was December 16, 2022, which was not a holiday or a weekend. Thus,
appellant’s January 10, 2022 appeal was untimely filed by almost one month.
{¶5} This court is not empowered to extend the time deadline in civil cases.
Pendell, supra at 60; see also App.R. 14(B). Therefore, appellant’s motion to extend the
time for filing the appeal is overruled.
{¶6} Based upon the foregoing, appellee’s motion to dismiss is hereby granted.
This appeal is dismissed pursuant to App.R. 4(A)(1).
THOMAS R. WRIGHT, P.J.,
CYNTHIA WESTCOTT RICE, J.,
concur. 2
Case No. 2022-A-0001
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2022 Ohio 331, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lacy-v-yan-ashtabula-cty-dog-warden-ohioctapp-2022.