-
MEMORANDUM OPINION {¶ 1} On October 4, 2005, appellant, City of Warren, Ohio Police Department, filed a notice of appeal with this court from a September 12, 2005 judgment of the Warren Municipal Court.{¶ 2} In the September 12, 2005 judgment entry, the trial court adopted the magistrate's decision and overruled appellant's objections. Specifically, the court found that it had jurisdiction in the matter, and that a replevin action was not proper in this instance. The lower court also granted leave for appellant to file an amended complaint and indicated that the case is set for a hearing on the merits. It is from that entry that appellant filed its notice of appeal.
{¶ 3} According to Section
3 (B)(2 ), ArticleIV 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. Germ v. Fuerst, 11th Dist. No. 2003-L-116,2003-Ohio-6241 , ¶3 . The Ohio Legislature in R.C.2505.02 (B) has set forth five categories of a "final order" for purposes of the constitutional provision, and if a trial court's judgment satisfies any of the five categories, it will be considered a "final order" which can be immediately appealed and reviewed by a court of appeals. R.C.2505.02 (B) states that:{¶ 4} "An order is a final order that may be reviewed, affirmed, modified, or reversed, with or without retrial, when it is one of the following:
{¶ 5} "(1) An order that affects a substantial right in an action that in effect determines the action and prevents a judgment;
{¶ 6} "(2) An order that affects a substantial right made in a special proceeding or upon a summary application in an action after judgment;
{¶ 7} "(3) An order that vacates or sets aside a judgment or grants a new trial;
{¶ 8} "(4) An order that grants or denies a provisional remedy and to which both of the following apply:
{¶ 9} "(a) The order in effect determines the action with respect to the provisional remedy and prevents a judgment in the action in favor of the appealing party with respect to the provisional remedy.
{¶ 10} "(b) The appealing party would not be afforded a meaningful or effective remedy by an appeal following final judgment as to all proceedings, issues, claims, and parties in the action.
{¶ 11} "(5) An order that determines that an action may or may not be maintained as a class action;
{¶ 12} (6) An order determining the constitutionality of any changes to the Revised Code * * *."
{¶ 13} In the instant matter, the trial court's order does not fit within any of the categories of R.C.
2505.05 . Specifically, in this instance, the court essentially concluded that even though the party had designated his claim as one for replevin, that designation was incorrect, and the court had jurisdiction over a potentially properly amended complaint.{¶ 14} Furthermore, the order appellant appealed from is simply an interlocutory order since it indicates that the case is set for a hearing on the merits. It is not a final order, and appellant will have a meaningful and effective remedy by means of an appeal once a final judgment is reached as to all claims and parties when the case is decided and/or dismissed.
{¶ 15} Based upon the foregoing analysis, this appeal is not a final appealable order.
{¶ 16} Appeal dismissed.
O'Neill, J., Grendell, J., concur.
Document Info
Docket Number: No. 2005-T-0117.
Judges: COLLEEN MARY O'TOOLE, J.
Filed Date: 12/23/2005
Precedential Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/18/2021