The opinion
Ohio Council 8, American Federation of State, County and
Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO, et al., Cross-Appellants, v.
Summit County Child Support Enforcement Agency; State
Employment Relations Board, Cross-Appellee.
[Cite as Ohio Council 8, Am. Fedn. of State, Cty. & Mun. Emp.,
AFL-CIO v. Summit Cty. Child Support Enforcement Agency
(1994), Ohio St.3d .]
State Employment Relations Board -- Court of Appeals'
findings of trial court's subject-matter jurisdiction and
lack of jurisdiction to hear union's appeal from decision
of SERB affirmed -- Ruling on other assignments of error
vacated.
(No. 92-2326 -- Submitted January 26, 1994 -- Decided
March 23, 1994.)
Cross-Appeal from the Court of Appeals for Franklin
County, No. 92AP-304.
Michael A. Moses and Ronald H. Janetzke, for
cross-appellants.
Lee I. Fisher, Attorney General, and Joseph M. Oser,
Assistant Attorney General, for cross-appellee.
Means, Bichimer, Burkholder & Baker Co., L.P.A., and
Kimball H. Carey, urging affirmance on jurisdictional issues
for amicus curiae, Ohio School Boards Association.
In this cause, the trial court, in a Journal Entry filed
on March 19, 1992, said that: "Appellee State Employment
Relations Board has filed a motion to dismiss for the reason
that this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. Upon
consideration thereof, and for the reasons set forth in the
Decision of this Court rendered February 6, 1992, the Court
finds the motion well taken." Thus, the trial court, having
found that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction, had no
authority to decide any of the issues in the case. The trial
court then dismissed the appeal.
Ohio Council 8, American Federation of State, County and
Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO ("AFSCME") appealed the judgment
of the trial court to the Court of Appeals for Franklin
County. Accordingly, and notwithstanding extensive assignments
of error presented by AFSCME, the only issue before the court
of appeals was the question of the trial court's subject-matter
jurisdiction to hear the appeal of AFSCME from the decision of
the State Employment Relations Board.
In an opinion rendered on September 24, 1992, the court of
appeals held, in part, that "* * * the common pleas court was
correct insofar as it concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to
determine whether the conduct of [Summit County Child Support
Enforcement Agency] and [Summit County Department of Human
Services] constituted an unfair labor practice under R.C.
4117.11." (Emphasis added.) The court of appeals went on to
say, "However, the common pleas court had jurisdiction to
review SERB's finding that AFSCME had engaged in an authorized
strike against [Summit County Child Support Enforcement Agency]
and an unauthorized strike against [Summit County Department of
Human Services]. * * *" (Emphasis added.) Notwithstanding
these findings on trial-court jurisdiction, the court of
appeals proceeded to rule on the other assignments of error
argued before it.
In consideration of the foregoing, the judgment of the
court of appeals, in its findings of jurisdiction and lack of
jurisdiction, is affirmed. The remainder of the opinion of the
court of appeals is vacated and this cause is remanded to the
trial court for further proceedings on all remaining issues.
Moyer, C.J., A.W. Sweeney, Douglas, Wright, Resnick, F.E.
Sweeney and Pfeifer, JJ., concur.