Steele v. Steele, 012221 OHCA2, 2020-CA-3

Docket Nº2020-CA-3
Opinion JudgeDONOVAN, J.
Party NameJESSICA P. STEELE Petitioner-Appellee v. KENNETH A. STEELE, II Respondent-Appellant
AttorneyLUCINDA WELLER, Atty. Reg. No. 0070667, 525 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 400, Toledo, Ohio 43604 Attorney for Petitioner-Appellee GREGG LEWIS, Atty. Reg. No. 0041229, 625 City Park Avenue, Columbus, Ohio 43206 Attorney for Respondent-Appellant
Judge PanelFROELICH, J. and HALL, J., concur.
Case DateJanuary 22, 2021
CourtCourt of Appeals of Ohio

2021-Ohio-148

JESSICA P. STEELE Petitioner-Appellee

v.

KENNETH A. STEELE, II Respondent-Appellant

No. 2020-CA-3

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Second District, Champaign

January 22, 2021

Appeal from Common Pleas Court- Domestic Relations Division Trial Court Case No. 2019-DR-258

LUCINDA WELLER, Atty. Reg. No. 0070667, 525 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 400, Toledo, Ohio 43604 Attorney for Petitioner-Appellee

GREGG LEWIS, Atty. Reg. No. 0041229, 625 City Park Avenue, Columbus, Ohio 43206 Attorney for Respondent-Appellant

OPINION

DONOVAN, J.

{¶ 1} Kenneth A. Steele, II appeals from the trial court's order granting a petition for a civil stalking protection order filed by his former wife, Jessica P. Steele. The court granted an order of protection for the parties' minor child, to be in effect for five years. Mr. Steele cannot challenge on appeal the trial court's grant of a civil protection order because he failed to file objections in the trial court, as required by Civ. R. 65.1. As such, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

{¶ 2} This Court recently discussed an amendment to Civ. R. 65.1 as follows: "When a magistrate has denied or granted a protection order after a full hearing, the court may adopt the magistrate's denial or granting of the protection order upon review of the order and a determination that there is no error of law or other defect evident on the face of the order." Civ.R. 65.1 (F)(3)(c)(ii). "[T]he magistrate's grant or denial of a protection order after a full hearing is not effective until adopted by the court." Heimann v. Heekin, 1st Dist. Hamilton No. C-130613, 2014-Ohio-4276, ¶7, citing Civ.R. 65.1(F)(3)(c). A trial court's adoption, modification, or rejection of a magistrate's denial or granting of a protection order after a full hearing becomes effective when it is signed by the court and filed with the clerk. Civ.R. 65.1 (F)(3)(c)(v).

Pursuant to Civ.R. 65.1(G), a trial court's decision to adopt a magistrate's decision that grants or denies a [civil protection order] is a final, appealable order. However, as of July 1, 2016, the rule requires a party to file timely objections to the trial court's order prior to filing an appeal. See Civ. R. 65.1 (G). Written objections must be filed within 14 days of the filing of the trial court's order. Civ. R. 65.1 (F)(3)(d)(i).

Since the July 1, 2016 changes to Civ.R. 65.1(G), several appellate districts have held that an appeal must be dismissed if timely objections were not filed. See, e.g., Casto v. Lehr, 5th Dist. Tuscarawas No. 2020 AP 02 0002, 2020-Ohio-3777, ¶ 19; Hetrick v. Lockwood, 6th Dist. Sandusky No. S-17-014, 2018-Ohio-118; J.S. v. D.E., 7th Dist. Mahoning No. 17 MA 0032, 2017-Ohio-7507; K.R. v. 7.6., 10th Dist. Franklin No. 17AP-302, 2017-Ohio-8647; Post v. Leopardi, 11th Dist. Trumbull No. 2019-T-0061, 2020-Ohio-2890.

In contrast, this court has not found the failure to file objections to be jurisdictional. See, e.g., Fecke v. Sizemore, 2d Dist. Montgomery No. 28536, 2020-Ohio-2851 (affirming a protection order due to appellant's failure to file objections); Whatley v. Canales, 2d Dist. Montgomery No. 28382, 2020-Ohio-213; Runkle v. Stewart, 2d Dist. Miami No. 2018-CA-27, 2019-Ohio-2356 (noting that the failure to file objections required dismissal, but nonetheless affirming the trial court's [protection order] due to failure to file objections); Anderson v. Gregory, 2d Dist. Montgomery No. 28277, 2019-Ohio-2346. See also Danison v. Blinco, 3d Dist. Crawford No. 3-18-19, 2019-Ohio-2767. Nevertheless, a party may not challenge the protection order on appeal if objections were not filed. Id.

Florenz v. Omalley, 2020-Ohio-4487, __ N.E.3d __, ¶ 7-10 (2d Dist.).

{¶ 3} Civ.R. 65.1 is clear that magistrate decisions after a full hearing are not subject to the requirements in Civ.R....

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP