Edn. Resources Inst. v. Grover

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

[Cite as Edn. Resources Inst. v. Grover, 2004-Ohio-3057.] COURT OF APPEALS STARK COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT EDUCATION RESOURCES INST Plaintiff-Appellee -vsVANCE GROVER Defendant-Appellant JUDGES: Hon. W. Scott Gwin, P.J. Hon. William B. Hoffman, J. Hon. Sheila G. Farmer, J. Case No. 2003CA00379 OPINION CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Appeal from the Stark County Court of Common Pleas, Case No. 2003CV02406 JUDGMENT: Dismissed DATE OF JUDGMENT ENTRY: June 7, 2004 APPEARANCES: For Plaintiff-Appellee For Defendant-Appellant TERRY D. ZIMMERMAN 520 South Main Street, #500 Akron, Ohio 44311 VANCE GROVER 1606 Frazer Avenue Nw Canton, Ohio 44703 Hoffman, J. {¶1} Defendant-appellant Vance Grover appeals the October 3, 2003 Judgment Entry entered by the Stark County Court of Common Pleas, which granted summary judgment in favor of plaintiff-appellee Education Resources Institution. STATEMENT OF THE FACTS AND CASE {¶2} On July 30, 2003, appellee filed a Complaint in the Stark County Court of Common Pleas, alleging appellant was in default on three promissory notes payable to appellee. Appellant filed a timely answer. Appellee filed a motion for summary judgment on September 4, 2003. In response, appellant filed an answer on September 9, 2003. Via Judgment Entry filed October 3, 2003, the trial court granted appellee s motion for summary judgment. {¶3} It is from this judgment entry appellant appeals raising the following assignments of error: {¶4} I. TRIAL JUDGE UNJUSTLY ENRICHED PLAINTIFF/APPELLEE, DEFENDANT S EXHIBIT DD. {¶5} II. TRIAL JUDGE ADDRESSED NO ISSUES PRESENTED BY DEFENDANT/APPELLANT AS STATED IN THE ISSUES PRESENTED PARAGRAPH, CONCERNING AMOUNT, INTEREST, AND PAYMENT. {¶6} III. TRIAL JUDGE MISAPPLIED EVIDENCE OF DEFENDANT/APPELLANT TO THE PREJUDICE OF DEFENDANT/APPELLANT, DEFENDANT S EXHIBIT E AND JUDGMENT ENTRY GRANTING PLAINTIFF S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. {¶7} IV. TRIAL JUDGE ACCEPTED ALL PLAINTIFF/APPELLEE CLAIMS WITHOUT SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE JUDGMENT ENTRY GRANTING PLAINTIFF S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. {¶8} Appellant did not attach proof of service to his Brief filed with this Court as required by App. R. 13(D).1 Accordingly, we dismiss appellant s appeal for want of prosecution. See, App. R. 18(C). By: Hoffman, J. Gwin, P.J. and Farmer, J. concur ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ JUDGES 1 Appellee did not file a reply brief. This is consistent with the fact appellant s brief does not contain the requisite proof of service. [Cite as Edn. Resources Inst. v. Grover, 2004-Ohio-3057.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR STARK COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT EDUCATION RESOURCES INST Plaintiff-Appellee -vsVANCE GROVER Defendant-Appellant : : : : : : : : : JUDGMENT ENTRY Case No. 2003CA00379 For the reason stated in our accompanying Memorandum-Opinion, appellant s appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. Costs assessed to appellant. ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ JUDGES

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.