2018 Ohio 213
Ohio Ct. App.2018Background
- Relator Technical Construction Specialties, Inc. (Masterfloors) obtained a summary-judgment order in its favor from Judge Henson in the Richland County Common Pleas Court.
- Relator appealed; this court held the order was not final and appealable because multiple claims/parties remained and the order lacked Civ.R. 54(B) language.
- Judge Henson later retired. The case remained pending and was reassigned to Judge DeWeese.
- Judge DeWeese set the matter for pretrial, reconsidered, vacated Judge Henson’s summary-judgment order, and set the case for trial.
- Relator sought extraordinary relief (writs of prohibition and mandamus) asking this court to prohibit the trial and to require vacation of Judge DeWeese’s order denying summary judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court lacked jurisdiction to vacate/modify the summary-judgment order | Judge DeWeese could not vacate the summary-judgment order; once granted the order could not be reopened | The summary-judgment order was not a final, appealable order and thus remained subject to modification | The order was not final/appealable; trial court could modify or vacate it |
| Whether a writ of prohibition or mandamus should issue to prevent the trial and compel vacation of the order setting trial | Relator has no adequate remedy at law and is entitled to extraordinary relief to protect the granted summary judgment | No unauthorized exercise of judicial power occurred; ordinary remedies remain available | Writs denied: relator failed to show the court patently lacked jurisdiction or a clear legal right to the relief requested |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Bell v. Pfeiffer, 961 N.E.2d 181 (Ohio 2012) (elements for writ of prohibition)
- State ex rel. Caskey v. Gano, 985 N.E.2d 453 (Ohio 2013) (availability of ordinary remedies bars prohibition)
- Chesapeake Exploration, L.L.C. v. Oil & Gas Comm., 985 N.E.2d 480 (Ohio 2013) (jurisdictional standard for extraordinary writs)
- State ex rel. Smith v. Hall, 50 N.E.3d 524 (Ohio 2016) (requirements for prohibition)
- Noble v. Colwell, 540 N.E.2d 1381 (Ohio 1989) (Civ.R. 54(B) language required for partial final orders)
- Jarrett v. Dayton Osteopathic Hospital, Inc., 486 N.E.2d 99 (Ohio 1985) (partial adjudications require Civ.R. 54(B) to be final)
- Whitaker-Merrell Co. v. Geupel Construction Co., 280 N.E.2d 922 (Ohio 1972) (same rule on modification of nonfinal orders)