Yeckley v. Yeckley, 2012 Ohio 84

Thomas Yeckley filed a partition suit against multiple co-owners and alleged interests by KeyBank and others in the property.
KeyBank was served; it did not answer; default judgment was entered against KeyBank in January 2008.
Magistrate issued partition plan; court adopted it and appointed a commissioner to partition or value the property.
KeyBank moved for relief from judgment; magistrate vacated the default and allowed KeyBank to answer; trial court adopted this, and KeyBank’s answer was deemed filed.
Richard Yeckley appealed; the prior appeals were dismissed for lack of a final appealable order since counterclaims remained unresolved.
May 5, 2011 order purported to finalize (no just cause for delay) but the court still left outstanding claims unresolved; appeal remained non-final.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether there is a final appealable order	Yeckley contends order granting relief from judgment is final	KeyBank contends interlocutory disposition is final under Civ.R. 54(B)	No final order; jurisdiction lacking; dismissal
Whether Civ.R. 60(B) applies to an interlocutory order	KeyBank’s Civ.R. 60(B) motion was improperly labeled as relief from judgment	Bank's motion was for relief from judgment	Motion was actually reconsideration of interlocutory order; Civ.R. 60(B) not applicable
Whether the court’s finalization with Civ.R. 54(B) language creates finality	Final order language renders it final	Finality depends on complete resolution of all claims	Finality not achieved; claims remained; no final appealable order

Lee v. Joseph Horne Co., 99 Ohio App.3d 319 (Ohio App. 1995) (interlocutory orders generally not subject to Civ.R. 60(B))
Beyke v. Beyke, 2005-Ohio-5465 (Ohio App. 2005) (interlocutory order review; Civ.R. 54(B) constraints)
Bodo v. Nationwide Ins. Co., 75 Ohio App.3d 499 (Ohio App. 1991) (interlocutory orders subject to revision prior to final judgment)