Eggleston v. Wood

2025-Ohio-5292 · Supreme Court of Ohio · November 26, 2025 · No. 2024-1791

Summary

The Supreme Court of Ohio held that Civ.R. 6(D) does not add three days to the deadline for filing objections to a magistrate’s decision under Civ.R. 53(D)(3)(b)(i) when the decision is mailed by the clerk. Because the objection period runs from the filing of the magistrate’s decision rather than service on the parties, the court affirmed the Ninth District Court of Appeals’ judgment.

Holdings

  1. Civ.R. 6(D) does not add three days to the period for filing objections to a magistrate's decision when the decision is served by mail or commercial-carrier service.
  2. The 14-day period for objecting to a magistrate's decision begins when the decision is filed with the clerk, not when the clerk mails the decision to the parties.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Civ.R. 6(D) adds three days to the 14-day period for filing objections to a magistrate's decision under Civ.R. 53(D)(3)(b)(i) when the clerk serves the decision by United States mail or commercial-carrier service.
  2. Whether the objection period begins when the magistrate's decision is filed with the clerk or when it is mailed to the parties.

Disposition

affirmed

Cases Cited (5)

  • State v. Hudson, 2022-Ohio-1435(followed)
  • Duganitz v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth., 2001-Ohio-1283(followed)
  • Pulfer v. Pulfer, 110 Ohio App.3d 90, 92-93 (3d Dist. 1996)(followed)
  • Zanesville v. Rouse, 2010-Ohio-2218(followed)
  • Harvey v. Hwang, 2004-Ohio-4112(followed)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…