[Cite as Schoeneman v. Minor, 2011-Ohio-5460.]

COURT OF APPEALS 

STARK COUNTY, OHIO 

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT 

LOUIS W. SCHOENEMAN JUDGES: 

 Hon. William B. Hoffman, P.J. 

 Plaintiff-Appellee Hon. Sheila G. Farmer, J, 

 Hon. John W. Wise, J. 

v. 

ROBIN MINOR Case No. 2011CA00063 

 Defendant-Appellant O P I N I O N

CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Appeal from the Court of Common 

Pleas, Probate Division, Case No. 

209849 

JUDGMENT: Dismissed 

 

DATE OF JUDGMENT: October 24, 2011 

APPEARANCES: 

For Plaintiff-Appellee For Defendant-Appellant 

GERALD L. BAKER DONALD GALLICK 

3711 Whipple Avenue, NW 190 North Union Street 

Canton, OH 44718 #102 

 Akron, OH 44304 

 
Stark County, Case No. 2011CA00063 2 

Farmer, J. 

{¶1} This case originated upon the filing of a complaint for the concealment of 

assets filed by appellee, Louis Schoeneman, against appellant, Robin Minor. In his 

brief at 13-15, appellee raises the issue as to whether the basis for the appeal, the trial 

court's March 14, 2011 judgment entry, is a final appealable order. For the following 

reasons, we find that it is not. 

{¶2} Ohio law provides that appellate courts have jurisdiction to review only 

final orders or judgments. See, generally, Section 3(B)(2), Article IV, Ohio Constitution; 

R.C. 2505 .02. If an order is not final and appealable, an appellate court has no 

jurisdiction to review the matter and it must be dismissed. 

{¶3} To be final and appealable, an order must comply with R.C. 2505.02. 

Subsection (B) provides the following in pertinent part: 

{¶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: 

{¶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} A complaint for the concealment of assets was filed on August 31, 2010 

wherein appellee requested the appearance of appellant for hearing and costs and 

attorney fees: 

{¶8} "WHEREFORE, he asks that a writ of citation be issued against Robin A. 

Minor requiring her to appear before said Court forthwith, then and there to be 
Stark County, Case No. 2011CA00063 3 

examined under oath touching the matters set forth in the Complaint, and that such 

other proceedings may be had in the premises as are authorized by law, including the 

cost of this action and attorney fees." 

{¶9} Following a hearing on February 28, 2011, the trial court issued the 

following order: 

{¶10} "Accordingly, the Court finds Robin A. Minor guilty of concealment of the 

Martin and Springfield firearms as alleged in the Complaint for Concealment of Assets. 

{¶11} "Ohio Revised Code § 2109.52 states that 'if such person is found guilty, 

the probate court . . . may order the return of the specific thing concealed. . .' The Court 

hereby ORDERS Robin A. Minor to return to Attorney Baker the Marlin and Springfield 

firearms listed in Items 16-23 of the Schedule of Assets within ten (10) days of the date 

of this Judgment Entry. Attorney Baker, attorney for the Estate, shall provide notice to 

the Court stating whether this Order has been complied with." Judgment Entry filed 

March 14, 2011. 

{¶12} An award for attorney fees is to be awarded to the complainant in an asset 

concealment action. R.C. 2109.50; R.C. 2109.52; In the Matter of: The Estate of Lena 

B. Simons, Deceased, Trumbull App. No. 2004-T-0066, 2005-Ohio 2362, ¶26. In this 

case, appellee was the complaining party and therefore was entitled to seek attorney 

fees as the fiduciary of the estate. Id. In its March 14, 2011 judgment entry, the trial 

court failed to make an award as to the costs and attorney fees properly prayed for in 

the complaint. 

{¶13} In addition, the very language of the trial court's judgment entry was 

conditional. It ordered the return of the property within ten days of the order, by March 
Stark County, Case No. 2011CA00063 4 

24, 2011, and ordered appellee's attorney to provide notice to the trial court that the 

order hads been complied with. 

{¶14} On March 22, 2011, appellant filed a notice of appeal, along with a motion 

to stay the judgment. The trial court did not address the stay request. On May 20, 

2011, appellant filed a motion for stay with this court. By judgment entry filed June 10, 

2011, this court denied the stay as "moot." The record does not suggest why this court 

considered the request to be moot. 

{¶15} As our brethren from the Twelfth District in In re: Estate of Meyer (1989), 

63 Ohio App. 3d 454, pointed out, although an asset concealment proceeding is a 

special proceeding involving a substantive right and a determination therefrom qualifies 

as a final appealable order, the order must include a finding of guilty and the imposition 

of penalties. The failure to address penalties, i.e., costs and attorney fees, sub judice 

render the order herein non-final. 

{¶16} Based upon the foregoing, this appeal is dismissed. 

By Farmer, J. 

Wise, J. concur and 

Hoffman, P.J. concurs separately. 

 _s/ Sheila G. Farmer______________ 

 

 _s/ John W. Wise_____________________ 

 _______________________________ 

 JUDGES 
Stark County, Case No. 2011CA00063 5 

Hoffman, P.J., concurring 

(¶17) I concur in the majority’s decision to dismiss this appeal for want of a final 

appealable order. 

(¶18) I write separately to note I do so only because of the lack of a decision as 

to attorney fees. Unlike the majority, I do not find the inclusion of language in the 

judgment entry concerning notice to the court of compliance renders the judgment 

conditional; therefore, not final. 

 ________________________________ 

 HON. WILLIAM B. HOFFMAN 
[Cite as Schoeneman v. Minor, 2011-Ohio-5460.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR STARK COUNTY, OHIO 

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT 

LOUIS W. SCHOENEMAN : 

 : 

 Plaintiff-Appellee : 

 : 

v. : JUDGMENT ENTRY 

 : 

ROBIN MINOR : 

 : 

 Defendant-Appellant : CASE NO. 2011CA00063 

For the reasons stated in our accompanying Memorandum-Opinion, this appeal 

is dismissed. Costs to appellant. 

 

 _s/ Sheila G. Farmer______________ 

 

 _s/ John W. Wise_________________ 

 _s/ William B. Hoffman_____________ 

 JUDGES