Alternatives Unlimited-Special, Inc. v. Ohio Dept. of Edn.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as Alternatives Unlimited-Special, Inc. v. Ohio Dept. of Edn., 2008-Ohio-2441.] Court of Claims of Ohio The Ohio Judicial Center 65 South Front Street, Third Floor Columbus, OH 43215 614.387.9800 or 1.800.824.8263 www.cco.state.oh.us ALTERNATIVES UNLIMITEDSPECIAL, INC., et al. Plaintiffs v. OHIO DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Defendant [Cite as Alternatives Unlimited-Special, Inc. v. Ohio Dept. of Edn., 2008-Ohio-2441.] Case No. 2002-04682 Case No. 2002-04682 Judge Joseph T. Clark JUDGMENT ENTRY -3- JUDGMENT ENTRY [Cite as Alternatives Unlimited-Special, Inc. v. Ohio Dept. of Edn., 2008-Ohio-2441.] {¶1} On April 10, 2008, the court granted partial summary judgment in favor of defendant. On April 23, 2008, plaintiffs filed a motion to amend their complaint pursuant to Civ.R. 15(A) to dismiss all remaining claims against defendant without prejudice. Plaintiffs intend to file a notice of appeal of the court s April 10, 2008 judgment to the Tenth District Court of Appeals. On April 28, 2008, defendant filed a waiver of objection to plaintiffs motion to amend complaint. {¶2} Although there is some disagreement among Ohio appellate courts whether Civ.R. 15(A) is the appropriate procedural vehicle for a party to create a final appealable order under such circumstances, the majority of courts in Ohio favor that approach.1 See Pattison v. W.W. Grainger, Inc., Cuyahoga App. No. 88556, 2007Ohio-3081; Borchers v. Winzeler Excavating Co. (Apr. 10, 1992), Montgomery App. No. 13297; Lewis v. J.E. Wiggins & Co., Franklin App. Nos. 04AP-469, 04AP-544, 04AP668, 2004-Ohio-6724. Accordingly, plaintiffs motion to amend the complaint is GRANTED. {¶3} Inasmuch as the court has previously granted summary judgment for defendant, the portion of the court s June 14, 2007 entry scheduling trial for May 5-8, 2008, is hereby VACATED. Court costs are assessed against plaintiffs. The clerk shall serve upon all parties notice of this judgment and its date upon the journal. _____________________________________ JOSEPH T. CLARK Judge cc: 1 The following question has been certified to the Supreme Court of Ohio. In a case where a plaintiff has asserted multiple claims against a single defendant and some of those claims have been ruled upon but not converted into a final order with Civ.R. 54(B), can the plaintiff create a final order by voluntarily dismissing pursuant to Civ.R. 41(A) the remaining claims asserted against that defendant. Pattison v. W.W. Grainger,Inc., 115 Ohio St.3d 1406, 2007-Ohio-4884. Case No. 2002-04682 Christopher N. Slagle Luther L. Liggett Terrence N. O Donnell 100 South Third Street Columbus, Ohio 43215-4291 Susan M. Sullivan Assistant Attorney General 150 East Gay Street, 23rd Floor Columbus, Ohio 43215-3130 SJM/cmd Filed May 2, 2008 To S.C. reporter May 21, 2008 -5- JUDGMENT ENTRY Kyle E. Lathwell Mindy A. Worly Assistant Attorneys General Education Section 30 East Broad Street, 16th Floor Columbus, Ohio 43215
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
