Ohio Bd. of Motor Vehicle Repair v. Griffin
2017 Ohio 9129
Ohio Ct. App.2017Background
- The Ohio Board of Motor Vehicle Repair sued Michael Griffin alleging he operated an auto repair/window‑tint business without registering under R.C. Chapter 4775 and sought injunctive and declaratory relief.
- Trial court denied Griffin's early motions to dismiss and later granted the board's motion for summary judgment on September 30, 2016, but did not specify remedial relief in that entry.
- Griffin filed multiple post‑judgment motions (including motions to vacate) and notices of appeal; several related trial entries followed (Nov. 22 and Dec. 8, 2016).
- The Tenth District previously consolidated related appeals and, in a companion decision (Tintmasters), concluded the September 30, 2016 entry was not a final appealable order because it neither awarded relief nor included Civ.R. 54(B) language resolving all claims.
- Griffin filed a second motion to vacate the September 30 judgment on January 16, 2017; the trial court struck it on Jan. 17, 2017 as divested of jurisdiction by Griffin’s earlier notice(s) of appeal. Griffin appealed that strike.
- The court of appeals dismissed the present appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the January 17, 2017 order challenged the same nonfinal September 30, 2016 judgment and thus was not a final, appealable order; it also noted the trial court was divested of jurisdiction after the notice(s) of appeal were filed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether R.C. Chapter 4775 violates the Ohio one‑subject rule and summary judgment was improper | Board: summary judgment was properly granted; statute valid | Griffin: 4775 has multiple subjects and is unconstitutional under one‑subject rule | Not reached on merits—court dismissed appeal for lack of jurisdiction because underlying order was not final |
| Whether the trial court erred by striking Griffin’s Jan. 16, 2017 motion to vacate | Board: trial court lacked jurisdiction after Griffin perfected appeal | Griffin: trial court should have considered/vacated the September 30 judgment | Court held it lacked jurisdiction to review Jan. 17, 2017 order because it was not a final appealable order and, in any event, the trial court was divested of jurisdiction once appeal was perfected |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Electronic Classroom of Tomorrow v. Cuyahoga Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 129 Ohio St.3d 30 (2011) (trial court loses authority over matters inconsistent with an appellate court’s jurisdiction once an appeal is perfected)
- State ex rel. Rock v. School Employees Retirement Board, 96 Ohio St.3d 206 (2002) (an appeal divests the trial court of jurisdiction to act in ways inconsistent with appellate review)