Sielaff v. Carvcasci
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as Sielaff v. Carvcasci, 2010-Ohio-4564.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT LAKE COUNTY, OHIO ROGER SIELAFF, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees/ Cross-Appellants, : MEMORANDUM OPINION : CASE NO. 2010-L-085 : - vs : MICHAEL C. CARVCASCI, et al., : Defendants-Appellants/ Cross-Appellees, (JOHN W. BOSCO, : : Appellant/Cross-Appellee). Civil Appeal from the Painesville Municipal Court, Case No. 08 CVG 01807. Judgment: Cross-appeal dismissed. Gerald J. Patronite, 34950 Chardon Road, #210, Willoughby Hills, OH 44094-9162 (For Plaintiffs-Appellees/Cross-Appellants). Michael C. Carvcasci and Kellie A. Swaney, pro se, 16206 Moseley Road, Madison, OH 44057-9407 (Defendants-Appellants/Cross-Appellees). John W. Bosco, John W. Bosco Co., L.P.A., pro se, Paramount Building, 31805 Vine Street, Willowick, OH 44095 (Appellant/Cross-Appellee). CYNTHIA WESTCOTT RICE, J. {¶1} On July 15, 2010, appellants/cross-appellees, Michael C. Carvcasci and Kellie A. Swaney and John W. Bosco, filed a notice of appeal from a June 18, 2010 entry from the Painesville Municipal Court. Appellees/cross-appellants, Roger Sielaff and Lynn Sielaff, filed their cross-appeal on August 5, 2010. {¶2} In the case at hand, Roger and Lynn Sielaff had the option of filing their cross-appeal within ten days of appellants filing their notice of appeal under App.R. 4(B)(1), or the traditional thirty-day window created by App.R. 4(A). Therefore, pursuant to the foregoing rules, the latest that Roger and Lynn Sielaff could have filed their crossappeal was July 26, 2010. {¶3} Here, the record indicates that the cross-appeal was filed with this court on August 5, 2010, which is ten days beyond the required time limit of App.R. 4(B)(1). The time requirements for filing a cross-appeal pursuant to App.R. 4(A) and App.R. 4(B)(1) are mandatory and jurisdictional. Kaplysh v. Takieddine (1988), 35 Ohio St.3d 170. See, also, Reeves v. Hurley, 11th Dist. No. 2009-G-2911, 2009-Ohio-4622, at ¶2. As a result, this court lacks jurisdiction under App.R. 4(A), and thus, cannot address the merits of Roger and Lynn Sielaff s untimely cross-appeal. {¶4} Based upon the foregoing analysis, Roger and Lynn Sielaff s cross-appeal is hereby, sua sponte, dismissed for untimeliness. However, the appeal filed by appellants can proceed. {¶5} Cross-appeal dismissed. MARY JANE TRAPP, P.J., concurs, COLLEEN MARY O TOOLE, J., concurs in judgment only. 2
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.
