State Ex Rel. Martin v. Ohio Adult Parole Authority

Ohio Supreme Court

State Ex Rel. Martin v. Ohio Adult Parole Authority

2009 Ohio 6164, 918 N.E.2d 1005, 124 Ohio St. 3d 63

Ohio Supreme Court·Decided December 1, 2009·No. 2009-1279·Published·Cited by 11 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

{¶ 1} We dismiss the appeal of appellant, Robert Martin, because although he challenges the court of appeals’ April 2009 judgment dismissing his complaint for a writ of mandamus and declaratory relief, he did not file t a timely appeal from that judgment. S.Ct.Prae.R. II(2)(A)(1). Neither his motion for reconsideration nor his Civ.R. 60(B) motion for relief from judgment extended his time to appeal the judgment. Cotten v. Fitzpatrick, 98 Ohio St.3d 24, 2002-Ohio-7043, 780 N.E.2d 1019, ¶ 6; Key v. Mitchell (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 89, 90, 689 N.E.2d 548. Finally, a “Civ.R. 60(B) motion for relief from judgment cannot be used as a substitute for a timely appeal * * Id. at 90-91, 689 N.E.2d 548; State ex rel. Richard v. Cuyahoga Cty. Commrs. (2000), 89 Ohio St.3d 205, 206, 729 N.E.2d 755.

Appeal dismissed.

Moyer, C.J., and Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, and Cupp, JJ., concur. *64 Richard Cordray, Attorney General, and Melissa Montgomery, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

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

Per Curiam.

{¶ 1} We dismiss the appeal of appellant, Robert Martin, because although he challenges the court of appeals’ April 2009 judgment dismissing his complaint for a writ of mandamus and declaratory relief, he did not file t a timely appeal from that judgment. S.Ct.Prae.R. II(2)(A)(1). Neither his motion for reconsideration nor his Civ.R. 60(B) motion for relief from judgment extended his time to appeal the judgment. Cotten v. Fitzpatrick, 98 Ohio St.3d 24, 2002-Ohio-7043, 780 N.E.2d 1019, ¶ 6; Key v. Mitchell (1998), 81 Ohio St.3d 89, 90, 689 N.E.2d 548. Finally, a “Civ.R. 60(B) motion for relief from judgment cannot be used as a substitute for a timely appeal * * Id. at 90-91, 689 N.E.2d 548; State ex rel. Richard v. Cuyahoga Cty. Commrs. (2000), 89 Ohio St.3d 205, 206, 729 N.E.2d 755.

Appeal dismissed.

Moyer, C.J., and Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Connor, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, and Cupp, JJ., concur. *64 Richard Cordray, Attorney General, and Melissa Montgomery, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

State Ex Rel. Martin v. Ohio Adult Parole Authority, 2009 Ohio 6164, 918 N.E.2d 1005, 124 Ohio St. 3d 63 (Ohio 2009).

Pincite

2009 Ohio 6164 (State Ex Rel. Martin v. Ohio Adult Parole Authority) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related