[Cite as Bykova v. McBrayer, 2013-Ohio-5745.]
Court of Appeals of Ohio
EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
No. 100172
IRINA BYKOVA
PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT
vs.
DENISE MCBRAYER
DEFENDANT-APPELLEE
JUDGMENT:
DISMISSED
Civil Appeal from the
Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas
Case No. CV-791833
BEFORE: E.T. Gallagher, J., Boyle, P.J., and McCormack, J.
RELEASED AND JOURNALIZED: December 26, 2013
FOR APPELLANT
Irina Bykova, pro se
3056 West 44th Street
Cleveland, Ohio 44113
FOR APPELLEE
Denise McBrayer, pro se
3060 West 44th Street
Cleveland, Ohio 44113
EILEEN T. GALLAGHER, J.:
{¶1} Plaintiff-appellant, Irina Bykova (“Bykova”), appeals the trial court’s
judgment adopting defendant-appellee’s, Denise McBrayer’s (“McBrayer”), proposed
settlement terms in its final judgment. Having determined that the court’s final judgment
is not a final, appealable order, we dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
{¶2} Bykova and McBrayer have had an antagonistic relationship since Bykova
and her family moved in next door to McBrayer’s house. Although the parties’
relationship was hostile from the start, Bykova eventually sought a civil protection order,
alleging that McBrayer’s behavior had become increasingly aggressive. Following a
hearing on the motion, the court ordered the parties to submit proposed terms that the
court could adopt in its final decision. The trial court subsequently rendered the
following judgment:
Parties submitted agreed upon terms both of which are hereby incorporated
into a court order. The court reserves jurisdiction to enforce the parties’
agreed upon terms for coexistence. With any perceived violation of these
terms, parties are hereby directed to contact the court at which time a
contempt hearing may be scheduled. This matter is hereby deemed
resolved.
{¶3} The main purpose of a final order or judgment is to terminate the case or
controversy the parties presented to the trial court for resolution. Stumph Rd. Properties
v. Vargo, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 89811, 2008-Ohio-1830, ¶ 13. To terminate the
matter, the court’s order must contain a statement of the relief granted to the parties.
Harkai v. Scherba Industries, Inc., 136 Ohio App.3d 211, 216, 736 N.E.2d 101 (9th
Dist.2000). A judgment that does not specify the relief granted does not terminate the
action and does not constitute a final, appealable order. Id. at 221. Furthermore, a
judgment that requires the parties to refer to other documents does not constitute a final,
appealable order. Golden Goose Properties v. Daniel Leizman, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No.
99937, 2013- Ohio-5438, ¶ 7, citing Stumph Rd. Properties at ¶ 13.
{¶4} In this case, the trial court’s judgment expressly requires the parties to refer to
their proposed lists to determine their respective rights and obligations. The relief
purported to be granted is not evident from the face of the judgment entry. Therefore,
the court’s final judgment is not a final, appealable order.
{¶5} Appeal dismissed.
It is ordered that appellee recover of appellant costs herein taxed.
A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the
Rules of Appellate Procedure.
EILEEN T. GALLAGHER, JUDGE
MARY J. BOYLE, P.J., and
TIM McCORMACK, J., CONCUR