Sipan v. De La Paz

2025 Ohio 232

• Court: Ohio Court of Appeals
• Decided: January 27, 2025
• Docket: 2024-G-0048
• Status: Published

Opinion

[Cite as Sipan v. De La Paz, 2025-Ohio-232.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT GEAUGA COUNTY

KEN SIPAN, CASE NO. 2024-G-0048

Petitioner-Appellant, Civil Appeal from the - vs - Court of Common Pleas

COLLEEN DE LA PAZ, Trial Court No. 2024 DV 000555 Respondent-Appellee.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Decided: January 27, 2025 Judgment: Appeal dismissed

Ken Sipan, pro se, 16139 East High Street, Apt. 114, Middlefield, OH 44062 (Petitioner- Appellant).

Colleen De La Paz, 16187 East High Street, Middlefield, OH 44062 (Respondent- Appellee).

JOHN J. EKLUND, J.

{¶1} Appellant, Ken Sipan, filed a pro se appeal. Appellant petitioned the trial

court for a domestic violence civil protection order. On November 18, 2024, the

magistrate issued findings of fact, conclusions of law and a decision. It is from that

decision that appellant filed the instant appeal.

{¶2} Initially, we must determine if there is a final appealable order since this

court may entertain only those appeals from final judgments. Noble v. Colwell, 44 Ohio

St.3d 92, 96 (1989). Under Section 3(B)(2), Article IV of the Ohio Constitution, a judgment

of a trial court can be immediately reviewed by an appellate court only if it constitutes a

“final order” in the action. If a lower court’s order is not final, then an appellate court does not have jurisdiction to review the matter, and the matter must be dismissed. Gen. Acc.

Ins. Co. v. Ins. Co. of N. Am., 44 Ohio St.3d 17, 20 (1989).

{¶3} Pursuant to Civ.R. 53(D)(4)(a), a magistrate’s decision is not effective

unless it is adopted by the court. A magistrate’s decision is not final until it is reviewed

by the trial court and the trial court (1) rules on any objections, (2) adopts, modifies, or

rejects the decision, and (3) enters a judgment that determines all of the claims for relief

in the matter. Perkins v. Perkins, 2024-Ohio-5162, ¶ 15 (11th Dist.). Hence, until the trial

court adopts a magistrate’s decision, it is simply interlocutory. Id.

{¶4} This court has maintained that there is no final judgment “where a lower

court fails to adopt the magistrate’s decision and enter judgment stating the relief to be

afforded because ‘orders are not court orders unless certain formalities are met.’” Ledet

v. Ledet, 2023-Ohio-2926, ¶ 4 (11th Dist.). An action may only be terminated by judges,

not magistrates, by entering judgment. Id.

{¶5} In the instant matter, the November 18, 2024 magistrate’s decision is not a

final appealable order. Thus, this court does not have jurisdiction to hear this appeal.

Since the trial court has not yet adopted the magistrate’s decision, it remains an

interlocutory order and may be reconsidered upon the court’s own motion or that of a

party. Nothing is preventing appellant from obtaining effective relief through an appeal

once the trial court has entered a final judgment in the action.

{¶6} Based upon the foregoing analysis, there is no final appealable order.

Accordingly, the instant appeal is dismissed, sua sponte, for lack of jurisdiction.

ROBERT J. PATTON, P.J.,

EUGENE A. LUCCI, J.,

concur. 2

Case No. 2024-G-0048