Cedric Woods v. Fitz Simon, Inc. d/b/a Bar 145 (mem. dec.) ( 2020 )

MEMORANDUM DECISION
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), FILED
this Memorandum Decision shall not be Dec 18 2020, 8:21 am
regarded as precedent or cited before any
court except for the purpose of establishing CLERK
Indiana Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
the defense of res judicata, collateral and Tax Court
estoppel, or the law of the case.
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEES
Jason D. May Bryce H. Bennett, Jr.
Edward D. Thomas Laura S. Reed
Jason May Law Jaclyn M. Flint
Indianapolis, Indiana Riley Bennett Egloff LLP
Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Cedric Woods, December 18, 2020
Appellant-Plaintiff, Court of Appeals Case No.
20A-CT-1269
v. Appeal from the Allen Superior
Court
Fitz Simon, Inc. d/b/a Bar 145, The Honorable Nancy E. Boyer,
Halo Media, Inc., Adams Radio Judge
of Fort Wayne, LLC, John Doe Trial Court Cause No.
#1 Juan Escarbro, John Doe #2 02D01-1709-CT-531
Phillip Johnson, and John Doe
#3 Carlos Flores,
Appellees-Defendants.
Najam, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 20A-CT-1269 | December 18, 2020 Page 1 of 4
Statement of the Case
[1] Cedric Woods appeals the trial court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of
Fitz Simon, Inc. d/b/a Bar 145 (“the Bar”) on Woods’ complaint alleging,
among other claims, that the Bar’s negligence caused him personal injuries.
Woods presents a single issue for our review, namely, whether the trial court
erred when it entered summary judgment in favor of the Bar. However,
because we lack jurisdiction over this appeal, we do not reach its merits. We
dismiss.
Facts and Procedural History
[2] Woods attended a party at the Bar to celebrate New Year’s Eve during the late
hours of December 31, 2016, and the early morning of January 1, 2017. Woods
had observed fights break out during the party, and he eventually decided to
leave the Bar. As Woods was leaving, he was physically assaulted by an
independent contractor who had been hired by the Bar to provide security for
the party.
[3] In 2017, Woods filed a complaint, which he amended in 2019. Woods’
amended complaint named as defendants the Bar; Halo Media, Inc.; Adams
Radio of Fort Wayne, LLC; John Doe #1 Juan Escarbro; John Doe #2 Phillip
Johnson; and John Doe #3 Carlos Flores. In January 2020, the Bar moved for
summary judgment on each of Woods’ claims against it. Following a hearing
on that motion, the trial court entered summary judgment in favor of the Bar.
This appeal ensued.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 20A-CT-1269 | December 18, 2020 Page 2 of 4
Discussion and Decision
[4] We do not reach the merits of Woods’ appeal. As this Court explained in Bacon
v. Bacon, 877 N.E.2d 801, 804 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007), trans. denied:
The Indiana Court of Appeals has jurisdiction in all appeals from
final judgments. Ind. Appellate Rule 5(A). A “final judgment”
is one which “disposes of all claims as to all parties. . . .” App. R.
2(H)(1). A final judgment disposes of all issues as to all parties,
thereby ending the particular case and leaving nothing for future
determination. Georgos v. Jackson, 790 N.E.2d 448, 451 (Ind.
2003). Whether an order is a final judgment governs our . . .
jurisdiction, and it can be raised at any time by any party or by the
court itself. Id.
(Emphases added).
[5] Here, the trial court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the Bar did
not dispose of any issues as to the other defendants named in Woods’
complaint. And our review of the trial court’s chronological case summary
reveals that, while the trial court granted a motion to dismiss filed by Adams
Radio of Fort Wayne, LLC in July 2019, Woods’ claims against the remaining
defendants, including Halo Media, Inc., have yet to be resolved. Indeed, the
trial court has scheduled a status conference for January 12, 2021. By
definition, the order from which Woods appeals was not final because it did not
“dispose[] of all claims as to all parties.” App. R. 2(H)(1). Further, the trial
court’s order does not include the “magic language” from Trial Rule 56(C) that
would have converted its otherwise non-final order into a final order.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 20A-CT-1269 | December 18, 2020 Page 3 of 4
[6] As the trial court’s order was not a final judgment, Woods cannot appeal unless
the order is an appealable interlocutory order, which it is not. The order is not
appealable as of right under Appellate Rule 14(A), and Woods did not seek
certification of the order for a discretionary interlocutory appeal under
Appellate Rule 14(B). 1 See App. R. 14. Accordingly, we do not have
jurisdiction over this appeal.
[7] Dismissed without prejudice.
Riley, J., and Crone, J., concur.
1
In his notice of appeal, Woods purports to appeal from a final judgment.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 20A-CT-1269 | December 18, 2020 Page 4 of 4