Changeflow GovPing Courts & Legal Swiecicki v. Swiecicki - Appeal Dismissal
Routine Enforcement Added Final

Swiecicki v. Swiecicki - Appeal Dismissal

Favicon for www.courtlistener.com Ohio Court of Appeals
Filed April 6th, 2026
Detected April 7th, 2026
Email

Summary

Ohio Court of Appeals, Eleventh District dismissed Appellant Jeffrey Swiecicki's appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The court held that a magistrate's decision alone, without a separate and distinct final judgment entry from a judge, does not constitute a final appealable order under R.C. 2505.02(B). The case (Docket No. 2026-P-0012) affirms that only judges may terminate actions through judgment entries, and interlocutory appeals from magistrate decisions are not permissible until a final order is entered.

What changed

The Ohio Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal in Swiecicki v. Swiecicki, holding that a magistrate's decision is not a final appealable order under Ohio law. The court applied R.C. 2505.02(B), which defines final orders and appealable judgments, and Civ.R. 53(D)(2)(a)(i), which requires separate entries for magistrate decisions to become final. Appellant Jeffrey Swiecicki appealed a February 6, 2026 Magistrate's Decision, but the appellate court lacked jurisdiction because no separate final judgment entry had been issued by the trial court judge.

Compliance implications are limited to parties engaged in Ohio state court litigation. Litigants seeking to appeal magistrate decisions must ensure a final judgment entry has been issued by the trial court before pursuing appellate review. Pro se litigants should be aware that magistrate decisions are interlocutory and not immediately appealable; they must wait for the trial judge to issue a final order or entry to preserve appellate rights. The dismissal was uncontested as no opposition was filed to Appellee's motion to dismiss.

Source document (simplified)

Jump To

Top Caption Syllabus Combined Opinion The text of this document was obtained by analyzing a scanned document and may have typos.

Support FLP

CourtListener is a project of Free
Law Project
, a federally-recognized 501(c)(3) non-profit. Members help support our work and get special access to features.

Please become a member today.

Join Free.law Now

April 6, 2026 Get Citation Alerts Download PDF Add Note

Swiecicki v. Swiecicki

Ohio Court of Appeals

Syllabus

APPELLATE REVIEW - R.C. 2505.02(B); appeal from magistrate's decision is not final and appealable; Civ.R. 53(D)(2)(a)(i); separate and distinct entry needed; magistrate's decision alone is insufficient; interlocutory appeal; only judges not magistrates may terminate actions through a judgment; lack of jurisdiction.

Combined Opinion

[Cite as Swiecicki v. Swiecicki, 2026-Ohio-1229.]

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO
ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
PORTAGE COUNTY

JEFFREY A. SWIECICKI, CASE NO. 2026-P-0012

Petitioner-Appellant,
Civil Appeal from the
- vs - Court of Common Pleas

LISA M. SWIECICKI,
Trial Court No. 2024 DR 00197
Petitioner-Appellee.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT ENTRY

Decided: April 6, 2026
Judgment: Appeal dismissed

Jeffrey A. Swiecicki, pro se, 500 Treeside Drive, Stow, OH 44224 (Petitioner-Appellant).

Emily M. Rajah, Folan & Rajah, 122 North Prospect Street, Ravenna, OH 44266 (For
Petitioner-Appellee).

ROBERT J. PATTON, J.

{¶1} Appellant, Jeffrey A. Swiecicki, filed a pro se appeal from a February 6,

2026 Magistrate’s Decision. Appellee, Lisa M. Swiecicki, filed a motion to dismiss the

appeal for lack of jurisdiction, and no opposition was filed.

{¶2} Since this court may only entertain those appeals from final judgments, we

must determine whether there is a final appealable order. Noble v. Colwell, 44 Ohio St.3d

92, 96 (1989). A trial court’s judgment can be immediately reviewed by an appellate court

only if it constitutes a “final order” in the action. Ohio Const., art. IV, § 3(B)(2); Radic v.

Sternadel, 2025-Ohio-4527, ¶ 2 (11th Dist.). If a lower court’s judgment is not final, then
this court does not have jurisdiction to review the case, and the case must be dismissed.

Gen. Acc. Ins. Co. v. Ins. Co. of N. Am., 44 Ohio St.3d 17, 20 (1989).

{¶3} R.C. 2505.02(B) defines a “final order” and sets forth seven categories of

appealable judgments, and if a trial court’s judgment satisfies any of them, it will be

deemed a “final order” and can be immediately appealed and reviewed. In this case, the

February 6, 2026 Magistrate’s Decision being appealed does not fit within any of the

categories for being a final order under R.C. 2505.02(B) and did not dispose of all claims.

{¶4} Pursuant to Civ.R. 53(D)(4)(a), a magistrate’s decision is not effective

unless it is adopted by the court. Furthermore, a magistrate’s decision is not final until a

trial court reviews it and the trial court (1) rules on any objections, (2) adopts, modifies, or

rejects the decision, and (3) enters a judgment that determines all of the claims for relief

in the matter. Radic, supra, at ¶ 6. This court has maintained that no final judgment

exists if the trial court fails to adopt the magistrate’s decision and enter judgment stating

the relief to be afforded because an order is not a court order unless certain formalities

are met. Id. at ¶ 7. Only judges, not magistrates, terminate cases by entering judgments.

Id. Therefore, a magistrate’s decision is simply interlocutory until the trial court adopts it.

Id. at ¶ 6.

{¶5} Here, the February 6, 2026 Magistrate’s Decision is not final and

appealable, and we do not have jurisdiction to hear this appeal. Since the trial court has

not yet adopted the magistrate’s decision, it remains an interlocutory order and may be

reconsidered upon the court’s own motion or that of a party.

{¶6} Based upon the foregoing analysis, appellee’s motion to dismiss is hereby

granted, and this appeal is dismissed. However, nothing is preventing appellant from

PAGE 2 OF 4

Case No. 2026-P-0012
obtaining effective relief through an appeal once the trial court has entered a final

judgment in the action.

{¶7} Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

MATT LYNCH, P.J.,

EUGENE A. LUCCI, J.,

concur.

PAGE 3 OF 4

Case No. 2026-P-0012
JUDGMENT ENTRY

For the reasons stated in the memorandum opinion of this court, appellee’s motion

to dismiss is granted, and this appeal is hereby dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Costs to be taxed against appellant.

JUDGE ROBERT J. PATTON

PRESIDING JUDGE MATT LYNCH,
concurs

JUDGE EUGENE A. LUCCI,
concurs

THIS DOCUMENT CONSTITUTES A FINAL JUDGMENT ENTRY

A certified copy of this opinion and judgment entry shall constitute the mandate
pursuant to Rule 27 of the Ohio Rules of Appellate Procedure.

PAGE 4 OF 4

Case No. 2026-P-0012

Named provisions

R.C. 2505.02(B) Civ.R. 53(D)(2)(a)(i) Ohio Const. art. IV, § 3(B)(2)

Source

Analysis generated by AI. Source diff and links are from the original.

Classification

Agency
OH Court of Appeals (11th Dist.)
Filed
April 6th, 2026
Instrument
Enforcement
Legal weight
Binding
Stage
Final
Change scope
Minor
Document ID
2026 Ohio 1229
Docket
2026-P-0012

Who this affects

Applies to
Courts Legal professionals
Industry sector
5411 Legal Services 9211 Government & Public Administration
Activity scope
Appellate Procedure Civil Litigation
Geographic scope
US-OH US-OH

Taxonomy

Primary area
Judicial Administration
Operational domain
Legal
Topics
Civil Rights Consumer Protection

Get Courts & Legal alerts

Weekly digest. AI-summarized, no noise.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.

Get alerts for this source

We'll email you when Ohio Court of Appeals publishes new changes.

Optional. Personalizes your daily digest.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.