Manogg v. Wisniewski

2012 Ohio 3702

Opinion

[Cite as Manogg v. Wisniewski, 2012-Ohio-3702.]

COURT OF APPEALS LICKING COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

PHILIP S. MANOGG JUDGES: Hon. W. Scott Gwin, P.J. Defendant-Appellant Hon. William B. Hoffman, J. Hon. Julie A. Edwards, J. -vs- Case No. 12-CA-38 MINDY WISNIEWSKI

Plaintiff-Appellee OPINION

CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Appeal from the Licking County Municipal Court, Case No. 05 CVI 00849

JUDGMENT: Dismissed

DATE OF JUDGMENT ENTRY: August 14, 2012

APPEARANCES:

For Defendant-Appellant For Plaintiff-Appellee

PHILIP S. MANOGG, PRO SE MINDY WISNIEWSKI c/o P.O. Box 855 107 Rolling Meadow Court Newark, Ohio 43058-0855 Pickerington, OH 43147 Licking County, Case No. 12-CA-38 2

Hoffman, J.

{¶1} Defendant-appellant Philip Scott Manogg appeals the April 10, 2012

Judgment Entry entered by the Civil Division of the Municipal Court of Licking County,

which found he had been properly served in the underlying action. Plaintiff-appellee is

Mindy Wisniewski.

{¶2} Appellee did not file a reply brief in this appeal. Pursuant to App.R. 18(C),

this Court accepts Appellant’s statement of the facts and issues as correct.1

{¶3} This case comes to us on the accelerated and is calendar and is governed

by App.R. 11.1, which states the following in pertinent part:

{¶4} “(E) Determination and judgment on appeal

{¶5} “The appeal will be determined as provided by App. R. 11.1. It shall be

sufficient compliance with App. R. 12(A) for the statement of the reason for the court's

decision as to each error to be in brief and conclusionary form.

{¶6} The decision may be by judgment entry in which case it will not be

published in any form.

{¶7} We dismiss Appellant’s appeal for lack of a final appealable order. Our

reason follows.

{¶8} In its Judgment Entry dated April 10, 2012, after finding Appellant had

been properly served, the trial court scheduled an oral hearing on Appellant’s motion for

relief from judgment to be held May 21, 2012. Appellant filed his Notice of Appeal on

May 4, 2012, and requested a continuance of the trial court hearing. The trial court

granted Appellant’s request.

1 For a statement of the case, see this Court’s Opinion in Wisniewski v. Manogg, 2012- Ohio-1081. Licking County, Case No. 12-CA-38 3

{¶9} Because the trial court entry does not determine Appellant’s motion for

relief from judgment nor prevent Appellant relief thereunder, we find this Court lacks

jurisdiction pursuant to R.C. 2505.02.

{¶10} Appellant’s appeal is ordered to be dismissed.

By: Hoffman, J.

Gwin, P.J. and

Edwards, J. concur

s/ William B. Hoffman _________________ HON. WILLIAM B. HOFFMAN

s/ W. Scott Gwin_____________________ HON. W. SCOTT GWIN

s/ Julie A. Edwards___________________ HON. JULIE A. EDWARDS Licking County, Case No. 12-CA-38 4

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR LICKING COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

PHILIP S. MANOGG : : Defendant-Appellant : : -vs- : JUDGMENT ENTRY : MINDY WISNIEWSKI : : Plaintiff-Appellee : Case No. 12-CA-38

For the reason stated in our accompanying Opinion, this appeal is ordered

dismissed. Costs assessed to Appellant.

s/ William B. Hoffman _________________ HON. WILLIAM B. HOFFMAN

s/ W. Scott Gwin _____________________ HON. W. SCOTT GWIN

s/ Julie A. Edwards___________________ HON. JULIE A. EDWARDS