[Cite as Johnson v. St. Claire, 2018-Ohio-2510.]
COURT OF APPEALS
RICHLAND COUNTY, OHIO
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
ALICIA JOHNSON, ET AL. JUDGES:
Hon. William B. Hoffman, P.J.
Plaintiff-Appellees Hon. Craig R. Baldwin, J.
Hon. Earle E. Wise, Jr., J.
-vs-
Case No. 17CA77
BRIDGETTE ST. CLAIRE
Defendant-Appellant OPINION
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Appeal from the Richland Common Pleas
Court, Case No. 2015 CV 1083
JUDGMENT: Dismissed
DATE OF JUDGMENT ENTRY: June 21, 2018
APPEARANCES:
For Plaintiff-Appellees For Defendant-Appellant
NO BRIEF FILED NICHOLAS D. ATTERHOLT
Weldon, Huston & Keyser, L.L.P.
76 North Mulberry Street
Mansfield, Ohio 44902
Richland County, Case No. 17CA77 2
Hoffman, P.J.
{¶1} Appellant Bridgette St. Claire appeals the judgment entered by the Richland
County Common Pleas Court awarding Appellees Alicia and Robert Johnson damages
in the amount of $48,385.11 on their claim for breach of contract.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE1
{¶2} On August 28, 2015, Appellees filed the instant action against Appellant,
setting fourth six counts in their complaint: Count One, breach of an oral promise to repay
money; Count Two, unjust enrichment; Count Three, assault; Count Four, defamation;
Count Five, forgery; and Count Six, intentional infliction of emotional distress.
{¶3} The case proceeded to bench trial in the Richland County Common Pleas
Court on July 20, 2017. Following bench trial, the trial court issued a judgment in favor
of Appellees on their claim for breach of an oral promise to repay money loaned to
Appellant, and awarded damages in the amount of $48,385.11. The court did not rule on
the remaining counts set forth in the complaint.
{¶4} It is from the August 17, 2017 Judgment Entry, Appellant prosecutes this
appeal, assigning as error:
“I. THE TRIAL COURT COMMITTED REVERSIBLE ERROR IN
DETERMINING THAT THE STATUTE OF FRAUDS DID NOT BAR ANY
ALLEGED ORAL AGREEMENT.
1 A recitation of the facts is unnecessary for our disposition of this appeal.
Richland County, Case No. 17CA77 3
“II. THE TRIAL COURT COMMITTED REVERSIBLE ERROR IN
DETERMINING THAT A VALID ORAL AGREEMENT EXISTED BETWEEN
PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE AND DEFENDANT-APPELLANT IN REGARDS
TO ANY MONIES ALLEGEDLY LOANED.
“III. THE TRIAL COURT COMMITTED REVERSIBLE ERROR IN
DETERMINING THAT A VALID ORAL AGREEMENT EXISTED IN
REGARDS TO THE GIFT FROM PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE TO
DEFENDANT-APPELLANT OF A KUBOTA TRACTOR AND A FOUR
WHEELER.
“IV. THE TRIAL COURT’S CALCULATION DETERMINATION OF
DAMAGES FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE AGAINST DEFENDANT-
APPELLANT WAS AGAINST THE MANIFEST WEIGHT OF THE
EVIDENCE.”
{¶5} As a preliminary matter, we must first determine whether the order under
review is a final appealable order. If an order is not final and appealable, then we have
no jurisdiction to review the matter and must dismiss it. See Gen. Acc. Ins. Co. v. Ins. Co.
of N. Am., 44 Ohio St.3d 17, 20, 540 N.E.2d 266 (1989). In the event the parties to the
appeal do not raise this jurisdictional issue, we must raise it sua sponte. See Chef Italiano
Corp. v. Kent State Univ., 44 Ohio St.3d 86, 541 N.E.2d 64 (1989), syllabus.
{¶6} To be final and appealable, an order must comply with R.C. 2505.02 and
Civ.R. 54(B), if applicable.
{¶7} R.C. 2505.02(B) provides, in pertinent part:
Richland County, Case No. 17CA77 4
(B) 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:
(1) An order that affects a substantial right in an action that in effect
determines the action and prevents a judgment;
(2) An order that affects a substantial right made in a special
proceeding or upon a summary application in an action after judgment.
{¶8} Civ.R. 54(B) provides:
When more than one claim for relief is presented in an action whether
as a claim, counterclaim, cross-claim, or third-party claim, and whether
arising out of the same or separate transactions, or when multiple parties
are involved, the court may enter final judgment as to one or more but fewer
than all of the claims or parties only upon an express determination that
there is no just reason for delay. In the absence of a determination that there
is no just reason for delay, any order or other form of decision, however
designated, which adjudicates fewer than all the claims or the rights and
liabilities of fewer than all the parties, shall not terminate the action as to
any of the claims or parties, and the order or other form of decision is subject
to revision at any time before the entry of judgment adjudicating all the
claims and the rights and liabilities of all the parties.
Richland County, Case No. 17CA77 5
{¶9} Therefore, to qualify as final and appealable, the trial court's order must
satisfy the requirements of R.C. 2505.02, and if the action involves multiple claims and/or
multiple parties and the order does not enter a judgment on all the claims and/or as to all
parties; as is the case here, the order must also satisfy Civ. R. 54(B) by including express
language “there is no just reason for delay.” Internatl. Bhd. of Electrical Workers, Local
Union No. 8 v. Vaughn Indus., L.L.C., 116 Ohio St.3d 335, 2007–Ohio–6439, 879 N.E.2d
187, ¶ 7, citing State ex rel. Scruggs v. Sadler, 97 Ohio St.3d 78, 2002–Ohio–5315, 776
N.E.2d 101, ¶ 5–7. We note, “the mere incantation of the required language does not turn
an otherwise non-final order into a final appealable order.” Noble v. Colwell, 44 Ohio St.3d
92, 96, 540 N.E.2d 1381, (1989). To be final and appealable, the judgment entry must
also comply with R.C. 2505.02. Id.
{¶10} The entry in the instant case does not dispose of the claims set forth in
counts two through six of the complaint, and does not include Civ. R. 54(B) language
“there is no just cause for delay.”2 We find the August 17, 2017 judgment appealed from
is not a final, appealable order, and we therefore do not have jurisdiction over this appeal.
2We are not determining whether the inclusion of Civ.R. 54(B) language in this matter
would have rendered the judgment a final appealable order.
Richland County, Case No. 17CA77 6
{¶11} The appeal is dismissed.
By: Hoffman, P.J.
Baldwin, J. and
Wise, Earle, J. concur