Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Date: 07-31-2022
Case Style:
Bonita Stewart v. SOLUTIONS COMMUNITY COUNSELING AND RECOVERY
CENTERS, INC., ET AL
Case Number: 2022-OHIO-2522
Judge:
Maureen O'Connor; Presiding Judge
Sharon L. Kennedy
Patrick F. Fischer
R. Patrick DeWine
Michael P. Donnelly
Court:
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO
On Appeal From The Court of Appeals for Warren County
Plaintiff's Attorney:
Tell MoreLaw About Your Litigation Successes and MoreLaw Will Tell the World.
Re: MoreLaw National Jury Verdict and Settlement
Counselor:
MoreLaw collects and publishes civil and criminal litigation information from the state and federal courts nationwide. Publication is free and access to the information is free to the public.
MoreLaw will publish litigation reports submitted by you free of charge
Info@MoreLaw.com - 855-853-4800
Defendant's Attorney: Reminger Co., L.P.A., Robert W. Hojnoski, and Jennifer J. Jandes
Description:
Columbus, OH - Business Law lawyer represented appellee with appealing an overruled motion to dismiss.
In a December 30, 2020 decision, the trial court overruled appellants’
motion to dismiss, concluding that immunity from liability afforded to mentalhealth providers under R.C. 2305.51 does not apply in this case. Subsequently, in
a January 21, 2021 entry, the trial court deemed its December decision and entry a
final, appealable order and stated that there was “no just reason for delay for
purposes of Civ.R. 54.” Appellants then appealed to the Twelfth District. The
court of appeals considered appellants’ argument that the trial court erred in holding
that appellants are not entitled to statutory immunity under R.C. 2305.51. The court
of appeals found appellants’ argument to be without merit and affirmed the trial
court.
{¶ 3} We accepted appellants’ sole proposition of law for review: “Mental
health providers are immune from liability under R.C. 2305.51 when a patient
commits self-harm.” See 165 Ohio St.3d 1477, 2021-Ohio-4289, 177 N.E.3d 992.
{¶ 4} An appellate court has authority to review only final orders, and
without a final order, an appellate court has no jurisdiction. E.g., Supportive
Solutions, L.L.C. v. Electronic Classroom of Tomorrow, 137 Ohio St.3d 23, 2013-
Ohio-2410, 997 N.E.2d 490, ¶ 10. “ ‘Generally, an order denying a motion to
dismiss is not a final order.’ ” State Auto. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Titanium Metals Corp.,
108 Ohio St.3d 540, 2006-Ohio-1713, 844 N.E.2d 1199, ¶ 8, quoting Polikoff v.
Adam, 67 Ohio St.3d 100, 103, 616 N.E.2d 213 (1993). In this case, the trial court’s
denial of appellants’ motion to dismiss was not a final, appealable order, and the
trial court’s entry including Civ.R. 54(B) language did not make it so.
Outcome: Accordingly, because the trial court’s entry denying appellants’
motion to dismiss was not a final, appealable order, the court of appeals lacked
jurisdiction to issue its judgment in this case. We therefore vacate the judgment of the court of appeals and remand the case to the trial court.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments: