[Cite as Mundy v. Mundy, 2014-Ohio-1678.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT 

PORTAGE COUNTY, OHIO 

EDWARD L. MUNDY, : MEMORANDUM OPINION

 Plaintiff-Appellee, :

CASE NO. 2013-P-0102

 - vs - :

ELAINE M. MUNDY, et al., :

:

 Defendants-Appellants. 

Civil Appeal from the Portage County Court of Common Pleas. 

Case No. 2012 CV 0842. 

Judgment: Appeal dismissed. 

Robert W. Eckinger, Eckinger Law Offices, Ltd., 1201 30th Street, N.W., Suite 101B, 

Canton, OH 44709 (For Plaintiff-Appellee). 

Matthew C. Giannini, 1040 South Common Place, Suite 200, Youngstown, OH 44514 

(For Defendants-Appellants). 

TIMOTHY P. CANNON, P.J. 

{¶1} On December 16, 2013, defendants-appellants, Elaine M. Mundy, 

individually and as successor co-trustee; the Robert G. Hewitt Jr. Living Trust; Elena 

Mundy, a minor child; and Faith Mundy, a minor child, filed their notice of appeal. This 

appeal emanates from the November 19, 2013 judgment entry of the Portage County 

Court of Common Pleas, granting partial summary judgment in favor of plaintiffappellee, Edward L. Mundy. 
 2

{¶2} A review of the record in this matter reveals that appellee filed a complaint 

on July 20, 2012, against the foregoing appellants, as well as other defendants, Thomas 

M. Mundy, Bradford W. Levicky, and the Portage County Recorder. Appellants filed an 

answer and counterclaim against appellee on October 30, 2012. 

{¶3} Appellee filed a partial motion for summary judgment against all of the 

defendants on September 24, 2013. In the November 19, 2013 judgment entry, the trial 

court granted the partial summary judgment in favor of appellee and against appellants. 

However, the court did not rule on the partial motion for summary judgment as to the 

other defendants, Thomas M. Mundy, Bradford W. Levicky, and the Portage County 

Recorder. The trial court also did not dispose of the counterclaim filed by appellants. 

{¶4} On March 12, 2014, this court ordered the parties to show cause why this 

appeal should not be dismissed for lack of a final, appealable order. On March 19, 

2014, appellant filed a brief in support of a final, appealable order. 

{¶5} This court may entertain only those appeals from final judgments or 

orders. Noble v. Colwell, 44 Ohio St.3d 92, 96 (1989). According to Section 3(B)(2), 

Article IV of the Ohio Constitution: “Courts of appeals shall have such jurisdiction as 

may be provided by law to review and affirm, modify, or reverse judgments or final 

orders of the courts of record inferior to the court of appeals within the district * * *.” 

R.C. 2505.02 establishes the types of judgments or orders that this court has jurisdiction 

to hear and decide. If a lower court’s order does not comport with one of these 

categories, an appellate court does not have jurisdiction to review the matter, and the 

matter must be dismissed. Gen. Acc. Ins. Co. v. Ins. Co. of N. Am., 44 Ohio St.3d 17, 

20 (1989). 
 3

{¶6} In addition, for a judgment to be final and appealable, it must also satisfy 

the requirements of Civ.R. 54(B) where applicable. See Children’s Hosp. Med. Ctr. v. 

Tomaiko, 11th Dist. Portage No. 2011-P-0103, 2011-Ohio-6838, ¶3. Civ.R. 54(B) 

provides the following: 

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. 

{¶7} With few exceptions, where there are multiple claims and/or parties 

involved, an entry entering judgment as to one or more but fewer than all of the claims 

or parties is not a final, appealable order in the absence of Civ.R. 54(B) language 

stating that “there is no just reason for delay[.]” Meffe v. Griffin, 11th Dist. Trumbull No. 

2012-T-0032, 2012-Ohio-3642, ¶11. See also Elia v. Fisherman’s Cove, 11th Dist. 

Trumbull No. 2010-T-0036, 2010-Ohio-2522, ¶6. 

{¶8} Here, the trial court granted appellee’s partial motion for summary 

judgment as to some of the defendants with regard to only one of the claims in 

appellee’s complaint, to wit: the declaratory judgment request. In granting judgment in 

favor of appellee on this claim, it is clear other issues remain pending that are directly 

related to this request, such as potential damages. Without the inclusion of Civ.R. 54(B) 

language, no final, appealable order exists at this time. 
 4

{¶9} Based upon the foregoing analysis, this appeal is hereby dismissed due to 

lack of a final, appealable order. 

DIANE V. GRENDELL, J., 

CYNTHIA WESTCOTT RICE, J., 

concur.