From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Contel Credit Corp. v. Rosenblatt

Court of Appeals of Ohio
May 16, 1988
539 N.E.2d 708 (Ohio Ct. App. 1988)

Opinion

No. 53813

Decided May 16, 1988.

Appellate procedure — Failure to comply with App. R. 12(A) — Frivolous appeal — Sanctions — Award of attorney fees.

O.Jur 3d Appellate Review §§ 424, 427.

Where an appellant fails to comply with App. R. 12(A) by not briefing and arguing his assigned errors, the court may summarily reject his appeal and order him to pay attorney fees pursuant to App. R. 23.

APPEAL: Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County.

Dennis R. Tocci, for appellee.

Daniel M. Roth, for appellant.


Defendant presents ten assigned errors. However, his brief contains nothing more than a list of the proposed errors. He has failed to comply with App. R. 12(A), which requires an appellant to brief and argue each assigned error separately. Therefore, we summarily reject the defendant's appeal. Further, pursuant to App. R. 23, we direct that appellant shall pay appellee $100 toward appellee's attorney fees in defending a frivolous appeal.

Judgment accordingly.

NAHRA, C.J., and ANN MCMANAMON, J., concur.


Summaries of

Contel Credit Corp. v. Rosenblatt

Court of Appeals of Ohio
May 16, 1988
539 N.E.2d 708 (Ohio Ct. App. 1988)
Case details for

Contel Credit Corp. v. Rosenblatt

Case Details

Full title:CONTEL CREDIT CORPORATION, APPELLEE, v. ROSENBLATT, D.B.A. ORWELL COACH…

Court:Court of Appeals of Ohio

Date published: May 16, 1988

Citations

539 N.E.2d 708 (Ohio Ct. App. 1988)
43 Ohio App. 3d 113

Citing Cases

Templeton v. Sheets

We remind appellants that we may summarily reject a brief that is not compliant with the Rules of Appellate…

Taylor v. Franklin Blvd. Nursing Home

Assignments of error should designate specific rulings which the appellant wishes to challenge on appeal. N.…