Home › Case briefs › Civil Procedure

Hall v. Hall

Court of Appeals of Ohio, Sixth Appellate District, Lucas County · 2024 · Civil Procedure

Civil ProcedureAppellate ProcedureTimeliness of AppealCiv.R. 60(A)App.R. 4(A)(1)Civ.R. 60(A)clerical errornotice of appeal

Facts

The trial court entered a divorce judgment on December 20, 2022, awarding a Directions Credit Union account to Lindsay Hall as her separate property and ordering appellee to pay spousal support to appellant. Two days later, the court issued an amended judgment entry identical except that it changed the spousal-support obligation so that appellant, rather than appellee, was to pay support. Appellant filed his notice of appeal on January 20, 2023. In his appellate brief, appellant challenged only the award of the Directions Credit Union account and did not challenge the spousal-support correction.

Issue

When a trial court enters an amended judgment correcting an apparent clerical error under Civ.R. 60(A), does that amended entry extend the 30-day deadline to appeal a different part of the original judgment that was unchanged by the correction? More specifically, was appellant's notice of appeal timely when his only appellate challenge concerned the property award, not the corrected spousal-support provision?

Rule

Under App.R. 4(A)(1), a notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days of the final order's entry. A trial court may correct clerical mistakes under Civ.R. 60(A), but such a correction ordinarily does not extend or reset the time to appeal from the original judgment. The appeal time is extended only in the narrow circumstance where the clerical correction creates new rights, denies existing rights, or resolves a genuine ambiguity, and the appellant's notice of appeal raises an issue dependent on that correction.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Toledo, an Ohio domestic relations court entered a final divorce decree on April 1 awarding a lake cabin to Dana Mercer and ordering Jordan Mercer to pay $800 per month in spousal support. On April 3, the court issued an amended entry stating it was correcting a clerical mistake and changed only the support paragraph to require Dana, not Jordan, to pay support. Jordan filed a notice of appeal on May 2 challenging only the award of the lake cabin.

Is Jordan's appeal timely?

Explanation. Under App.R. 4(A)(1), the notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days of the final order, and that deadline is jurisdictional. A Civ.R. 60(A) correction of a clerical error ordinarily does not extend or reset the appeal time. The narrow exception applies only when the correction creates new rights, denies existing rights, or resolves a genuine ambiguity, and the issue on appeal depends on that correction. Here, Jordan challenges only the unchanged cabin award, so the amended support correction did not extend the deadline for that issue.