THE HOMELESS CHARITY, et al. Appellants
CITY OF AKRON Appellee
FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS COUNTY OF
SUMMIT, OHIO CASE No. CV-2018-10-4270
JEFFREY ROWES, ATTORNEY AT LAW, FOR APPELLANTS.
K. SIMPSON, ATTORNEY AT LAW, FOR APPELLANTS.
REBECCA J. SREMACK, ATTORNEY AT LAW, FOR APPELLANTS.
BELFANCE, DIRECTOR OF LAW, AND JOHN R. YORK AND BRIAN D.
BREMER, ASSISTANT DIRECTORS OF LAW, FOR APPELLEE.
DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
A. TEODOSIO JUDGE.
Sage Lewis LLC, Sage Lewis, and the Homeless Charity
(collectively "the Homeless Charity") appeal the
judgment of the Summit County Court of Common Pleas granting
the City of Akron's motion to dismiss. We affirm.
On October 16, 2018, the Homeless Charity filed an
administrative appeal with the Summit County Court of Common
Pleas, appealing the September 18, 2018, decision of the
Akron City Council denying a conditional use permit for the
property located at 15 Broad Street in Akron. The Homeless
Charity filed instructions for service with the Summit County
Clerk of Courts requesting certified mail service of the
notice of appeal be made upon "City of Akron, c/o Law
Director Eve Belfance" at the law director's
address: 161 South High Street, Suite 202, Akron, Ohio 44308.
The Clerk of Courts' website indicated that service was
made upon the law director on October 18, 2018, however the
corresponding document provided by the United States Postal
Service indicates that the recipient of the certified mail
was signed for by "C.O.C" at "205 S.
High[.]" 205 South High Street, Akron, Ohio, is the
address of the Summit County Clerk of Courts.
In December 2018, the City of Akron filed its motion to
dismiss the administrative appeal, and attached three
affidavits in support. The motion argued that because a
notice of the appeal was not filed with Akron City Council
pursuant to R.C. 2505.04, the administrative appeal was not
perfected and the trial court did not have jurisdiction. On
February 14, 2019, the trial court granted the City of
Akron's motion to dismiss, concluding that it was, in
fact, without jurisdiction because the Homeless Charity had
failed to perfect the administrative appeal.
The Homeless Charity now appeals to this Court, raising two
assignments of error.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR ONE
THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN HOLDING THAT APPELLANTS FAILED TO
PROVIDE EVIDENCE THAT IT IS SUFFICIENT TO SERVE THE NOTICE OF
APPEAL REQUIRED UNDER R.C. 2505.04 ON COUNSEL FOR THE AKRON