.]
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
LAKE COUNTY, OHIO
LINA D. CORNETT, : MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff-Appellant, :
CASE NO. 2013-L-039
- vs - :
CATHY CATULLO, :
Defendant-Appellee. :
Civil Appeal from the Willoughby Municipal Court, Case No. 12 CVI 02762.
Judgment: Appeal dismissed.
Lina D. Cornett, pro se, 5429 Chestnut Hill, Willoughby, OH 44094 (Plaintiff-Appellant).
Nicholas D. Laudato, 37265 Euclid Avenue, Willoughby, OH 44094 (For Defendant-Appellee).
DIANE V. GRENDELL, J.
{¶1} On May 6, 2013, appellant, Lina D. Cornett, pro se, filed a notice of appeal
from a March 26, 2013 entry of the Willoughby Municipal Court. The notice of appeal
was due on April 25, 2013, which was not a holiday or a weekend.
{¶2} App.R. 4(A) states that:
{¶3} “A party shall file the notice of appeal required by App.R. 3 within thirty
days of the later of entry of the judgment or order appealed or, in a civil case, service of
the notice of judgment and its entry if service is not made on the party within the three
day rule period in Rule 58(B) of the Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure.”
{¶4} Loc.R. 3(D)(2) of the Eleventh District Court of Appeals provides:
{¶5} In the filing of a Notice of Appeal in civil cases in which the trial
court clerk has not complied with Ohio Civ.R. 58(B), and the Notice
of Appeal is deemed to be filed out of rule, appellant shall attach an
affidavit from the trial court clerk stating that service was not
perfected pursuant to Ohio App.R. 4(A). The clerk shall then
perfect service and furnish this court with a copy of the appearance
docket in which date of service has been noted. Lack of
compliance shall result in the sua sponte dismissal of the appeal
under Ohio App.R. 4(A). (Emphasis sic.)
{¶6} Here, appellant has not complied with the 30-day rule set forth in App.R.
4(A) nor alleged that there was a failure by the trial court clerk to comply with Civ.R.
58(B). Appellant has not submitted an affidavit from the trial court clerk pursuant to
Loc.R. 3(D)(2). The time requirement is jurisdictional in nature and may not be enlarged
by an appellate court. State ex rel. Pendell v. Adams Cty. Bd. of Elections,
(1988); see also App.R. 14(B).
{¶7} Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed, sua sponte, pursuant to App.R.
4(A).
{¶8} Appeal dismissed.
CYNTHIA WESTCOTT RICE, J.,
THOMAS R. WRIGHT, J.,
concur.
2
