Rausch v. Rausch, Unpublished Decision (7-21-2005)

2005 Ohio 3730
CourtOhio Court of Appeals
DecidedJuly 21, 2005
DocketNo. 85600.
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 2005 Ohio 3730 (Rausch v. Rausch, Unpublished Decision (7-21-2005)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law.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
Rausch v. Rausch, Unpublished Decision (7-21-2005), 2005 Ohio 3730 (Ohio Ct. App. 2005).

Opinion

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
{¶ 1} This appeal is dismissed sua sponte for lack of a final appealable order.

{¶ 2} On October 27, 2004, the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas, Domestic Relations Division, issued a judgment entry with regard to defendant-appellee Robert Rausch's various post-divorce decree motions, including a motion for reallocation of parental rights and responsibilities, motion to modify child support, and motion to terminate spousal support.

{¶ 3} On November 3, 2004, plaintiff-appellant Mariann Rausch timely filed a motion for findings of fact and conclusions of law. On November 26, 2004, plaintiff filed a notice of appeal before the trial court ruled upon the motion for findings of fact and conclusions of law.

{¶ 4} When a party has timely filed a motion for findings of fact and conclusions of law, which has not been ruled upon by the trial court, no final appealable order exists from which to appeal. Walker v. Doup (1988), 36 Ohio St.3d 229; In re adoption of Gibson (1986),23 Ohio St.3d 170, 173; In re T.W., Cuyahoga App. No. 85559, 2005-Ohio-3128; Messina v. Good Times Café (May 23, 1991), Cuyahoga App. Nos. 58576, 58577, 58873.

Appeal dismissed.

It is ordered that appellee recover of appellant his costs herein taxed.

It is ordered that a special mandate issue out of this Court directing the Court of Common Pleas, Domestic Relations Division to carry this judgment into execution.

A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.

Blackmon, A.J., and Dyke, P.J., Concur.

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

Related

Spence v. Spence, Unpublished Decision (8-4-2005)
2005 Ohio 4016 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2005 Ohio 3730, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rausch-v-rausch-unpublished-decision-7-21-2005-ohioctapp-2005.