Partners for Payment Relief DE, L.L.C. v. Jarvis
2016 Ohio 7562
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Partners for Payment Relief sued Todd and Kimberly Jarvis for money judgment and foreclosure; Wells Fargo, Scioto County Treasurer, and Ohio Dept. of Taxation were named as potential lienholders.
- Trial court granted summary judgment to Partners and entered a foreclosure-related judgment that included Civ.R. 54(B) "no just cause for delay" language.
- The trial-court entry did not address or resolve Wells Fargo’s asserted property interest, though Wells Fargo had answered and asserted priority.
- The Jarvises appealed the summary-judgment entry to the Fourth District Court of Appeals.
- Appellees (Partners and Wells Fargo) moved in the trial court to amend the judgment to make it a final appealable order and asked this court to stay the appeal pending that amendment; the Jarvises did not oppose.
- The appellate court considered whether the judgment was a final, appealable order given the unresolved Wells Fargo lien and the Civ.R. 54(B) language.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial-court order is a final, appealable order | Partners contended the entry (with Civ.R. 54(B) language) is final and appealable | Jarvises argued the order is final and appealed (their position in brief not central to jurisdictional question) | Court held the order is not final because it failed to determine Wells Fargo’s lien; appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction |
| Whether Civ.R. 54(B) certification was proper when a co-lienholder’s interest remained unresolved | Partners (via the trial court entry) relied on Civ.R. 54(B) language to certify finality | Appellees/Wells Fargo argued the unresolved lien makes the certification unjustified | Court held Civ.R. 54(B) certification was not justified because interlocutory matters (Wells Fargo’s interest) remained; 54(B) ineffective here |
Key Cases Cited
- Chef Italiano Corp. v. Kent State Univ., 44 Ohio St.3d 86 (Ohio 1989) (sets standards for final, appealable orders under R.C. 2505.02)
- Noble v. Colwell, 44 Ohio St.3d 92 (Ohio 1989) (absent proper Civ.R. 54(B) language, judgments disposing of fewer than all claims are not final)
- Wisintainer v. Elcen Power Strut Co., 67 Ohio St.3d 352 (Ohio 1993) (standard for reviewing trial-court Civ.R. 54(B) factual determinations)
- CitiMortgage, Inc. v. Roznowski, 139 Ohio St.3d 299 (Ohio 2014) (foreclosure decree is final only if it determines each lienholder’s interest and priorities)