Court No. 2015-CV-354.
Katherine S. Decker, for appellants.
J. VanEerten, Ottawa County Prosecuting Attorney, and Blake
W. Skilliter, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellees.
DECISION AND JUDGMENT
1} In this accelerated appeal, appellants Jonathan
Dowling and Megan Meinerding appeal the judgment of the
Ottawa County Court of Common Pleas, which affirmed the
Catawba Island Township Board of Zoning Appeals' grant of
an area variance to Dwight and Barbara Roll. For the reasons
that follow, we affirm.
Facts and Procedural Background
2} This appeal largely concerns procedural matters.
Dwight and Barbara Roll own property adjacent to appellants.
On July 17, 2015, the Rolls submitted an application to
request an area variance from the setback requirements so
that they could expand their home. Appellants opposed the
variance request. Following a hearing, appellee, the Catawba
Island Township Board of Zoning Appeals, granted the
3} On November 13, 2015, appellants appealed
appellee's decision to the Ottawa County Court of Common
Pleas pursuant to R.C. 2506.01. The matter was briefed, and
on October 21, 2016, the trial court entered a judgment that
purportedly overturned appellee's decision.
4} On October 27, 2016, appellee filed a motion for
clarification, noting that the October 21, 2016 decision
contained errors, including that the heading did not match
the introductory paragraph, and the conclusion did not match
the analysis. Indeed, the only things in the October 21, 2016
judgment entry pertaining to the dispute before the trial
court were the heading and the first part of the first
sentence. The first sentence reads, "This case comes
before the Court upon Appellants Jonathan Downing and Me
(sic) Charles J. Walter's ("Walter") appeal of
a final decision of the Appellee, Danbury Township Board of
Zoning Appeals ("BZA"), denying Appellant's
application for a variance." The remainder of the
decision contains facts and analysis relative to Walter's
appeal, concluding with the trial court reversing the
decision of the BZA and granting the variance.
5} On December 20, 2016, the trial court entered an
amended decision, this time including facts and analysis
pertinent to the present case, and concluding that the
decision of appellee should be affirmed.
Assignment of Error
6} Appellants have timely appealed the trial
court's December 20, 2016 judgment entry, and now assert
one assignment of error for our review:
1. The trial court abused its discretion and erred as a
matter of law in granting Appellee Catawba Island Board of
Zoning Appeals' Motion for Clarification.