[Cite as Battle v. Favreau, 2014-Ohio-2170.]

COURT OF APPEALS 

MORGAN COUNTY, OHIO 

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT 

BILLY J. BATTLE 

 Plaintiff-Appellee 

-vsDAN W. FAVREAU, ET AL. 

 Defendant-Appellant 

JUDGES: 

Hon. William B. Hoffman, P.J. 

Hon. Sheila G. Farmer, J. 

Hon. John W. Wise, J. 

Case No. 13AP0004 

O P I N I O N 

CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Appeal from the Morgan County Court of 

Common Pleas, Case No. 13 CV 0042 

JUDGMENT: Dismissed 

DATE OF JUDGMENT ENTRY: May 19, 2014 

APPEARANCES: 

For Plaintiff-Appellee For Defendant-Appellant 

BILLY BATTLE, PRO SE LINDA L. WOEBER 

S.C.C Inmate #A617-868 BRIAN M. SPIESS 

5900 B.I.S. Road Montgomery, Rennie & Jonson 

Lancaster, Ohio 43130 36 East Seventh Street, Suite 2100 

 Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 
Morgan County, Case No. 13AP0004 2

Hoffman, P.J. 

{¶1} Defendant-appellant Dan W. Favreau appeals: 1) the September 4, 2013 

Decision entered by the Morgan County Court of Common Pleas granting in part 

Appellant's Motion to Dismiss the complaint against him filed by plaintiff-appellee Billy J. 

Battle; and 2) the October 24, 2013 Decision by that same court denying 

reconsideration. 

STATEMENT OF THE CASE1

{¶2} Appellee filed a complaint against Appellant on April 16, 2012, asserting 

six claims for relief which the trial characterized as the following four causes of action: 

1) slander and defamation; 2) negligence to prevent a conspiracy; 3) intentional infliction 

of emotional distress; 4) deprivation of his Civil Rights in failing to prevent a conspiracy. 

Appellant filed a motion to dismiss all claims against him on April 15, 2013, on the basis 

of absolute judicial immunity and failure to state a valid claim. 

{¶3} Via Decision filed September 4, 2013, the trial court granted Appellant's 

motion to dismiss, except for Appellee's defamation claim and intentional infliction of 

emotional distress claim. Appellant filed a motion for reconsideration on September 18, 

2013, reasserting as it basis absolute judicial immunity. The trial court denied 

Appellant's motion to reconsider via Decision filed October 24, 2013. 

{¶4} On November 22, 2013, Appellant filed his Notice of Interlocutory Appeal 

of the portion of the trial court's September 4, 2013 Decision denying, in part, his motion 

 

1

 A rendition of the facts alleged in Appellee's complaint is unnecessary of our resolution 

of this appeal. 
Morgan County, Case No. 13AP0004 3

to dismiss and the trial court's October 24, 2013 Decision denying his motion to 

reconsider. 

{¶5} Appellant' assigns as error; 

{¶6} "I. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN PARTIALLY DENYING THE 

HONORABLE JUDGE DAN FAVREAU'S MOTION TO DISMISS BILLY BATTLE'S 

CLAIMS BY DENYING THAT ABSOLUTE JUDICIAL IMMUNITY PROTECTED JUDGE 

FAVREAU FROM LIABILITY AS TO HIS ALLEGED STATEMENTS MADE ON APRIL 

16, 2012. 

{¶7} "II. THE TRIAL COURT FURTHER ERRED WHEN IT FAILED TO 

RECONSIDER ITS DECISION AND HELD AGAIN THAT ABSOLUTE JUDICIAL 

IMMUNITY DID NOT APPLY TO THE JUDGE'S ALLEGED STATEMENT." 

{¶8} Initially, Appellant raises the issue of this Court's jurisdiction to review an 

interlocutory appeal concerning the denial of absolute judicial immunity. Appellant 

analogizes to Ohio's sovereign immunity law as a reason to find the trial court's 

decisions are immediately reviewable "Because immunity is immunity..." (Appellant's 

Brief at p.3). We find Appellant's argument unpersuasive. 

{¶9} Unlike the legislature's specific declaration the denial of Ohio's statutorily 

created sovereign immunity is a final appealable order pursuant to R.C. 2744.02(C), the 

legislature has not done so with regard to the absolute judicial immunity established 

through common law. Because we find the trial court's entry does not finally determine 
Morgan County, Case No. 13AP0004 4

all claims asserted, nor prevent a judgment in Appellant's favor, we find this Court does 

not have jurisdiction over this appeal pursuant to R.C. 2505.02.2

{¶10} Appellant's appeal is dismissed. 

By: Hoffman, P.J. 

Farmer, J. and 

Wise, J. concur 

 

 

2

 We note, had we accepted Appellant's assertion this Court has jurisdiction over this 

"interlocutory appeal," we would still dismiss Appellant's appeal for lack of jurisdiction 

because it was untimely filed. A motion for reconsideration does not toll the time to file 

an appeal from an otherwise final appealable order. 
Morgan County, Case No. 13AP0004 5