COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA NOS. 67520, 67523 : IN THE MATTER OF: : FARRAH M. THOMAS (67520) and : TIFFANY N. THOMAS (67523) : JOURNAL ENTRY : Plaintiff-Appellee : and : [APPEAL BY: DEBORAH AYERS] : OPINION : DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT OF DECISION: JUNE 15, 1995 CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Civil appeals from the Juvenile Court Division of the Common Pleas Court Cases Nos. 9117215 and 9117216 JUDGMENT: Judgment vacated. DATE OF JOURNALIZATION: __________________________ APPEARANCES: For Appellee: For Appellant: DOMINIC M. ANTONELLI, ESQ. JOHN E. SCHOONOVER, ESQ. Rieth & Antonelli ALICE E. ROSEN, ESQ. 450 Standard Bldg. Wilsman & Schoonover 1370 Ontario Street 1608 Bond Court Bldg. Cleveland, Ohio 44113-1701 1300 East 9th Street Cleveland, Ohio 44114-1503 KAREN WEHR, ESQ. Guardian Ad Litem Skoch & Churchmack Co., L.P.A. 24930 Detroit Road Westlake, Ohio 44145-2528 - 2 - KARPINSKI, J.: These consolidated appeals arise from orders of the juvenile court following an agreed judgment entry in two child dependency/ abuse proceedings. The Cuyahoga County Department of Human Services ("CCDHS") commenced these two cases in the juvenile court on December 17, 1991, by filing complaints in Case Nos. 9117215 and 9117216 alleging that Farrah and Tiffany Thomas, respectively were dependent and/or abused. CCDHS subsequently obtained temporary custody of the two minor children which had been shared jointly by their natural parents, appellee George Thomas, D.O., and appellant Deborah Ayers. Thomas and Ayers were married but in 1/ the process of obtaining a divorce. The matter was ultimately resolved in the juvenile court on February 24, 1992, by a final disposition of the children to their parents in accordance with a comprehensive agreed judgment entry providing for shared parenting. George Thomas subsequently filed a motion to modify allocation of parental rights and responsibilities and to terminate child support in the two cases approximately twenty- two months thereafter on December 13, 1993. Thomas requested the clerk of the juvenile court serve Ayers, then known as Deborah Hamblin, with a copy of the motion by certified mail at an 1/ Ayers used the name Deborah Hamblin during the course of the proceedings in the juvenile court. - 3 - address in Missouri. The record does not indicate that service of the motion was ever made by the clerk of courts. The matter nevertheless proceeded to a hearing and the juvenile court found the motion well taken in orders journalized in the two cases approximately seven months thereafter on June 6, 1994. Ayers filed a timely notice of appeal. George Thomas has filed no appellee's brief. Ayers' first and second assignments of error follow: THE JUVENILE COURT ERRED BY FAILING TO SERVE THE APPELLANT PURSUANT TO JUVENILE RULE 16 OR THE RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. THE JUVENILE COURT LACKED JURISDICTION TO PROCEED AND/OR ISSUE JUDGMENT AGAINST APPELLANT WHEN NEITHER APPELLANT NOR HER COUNSEL HAD NOTICE OF THE HEARING. Ayers' first and second assignments of error are well taken. Ayers argues the juvenile court improperly entered its June 6, 1994, judgment entries since the continuing jurisdiction of the juvenile court was not properly invoked following the agreed judgment entry terminating these two cases. Juv.R. 35(A) establishes the procedure for invoking the continuing jurisdiction of the juvenile court and provides as follows: Continuing Jurisdiction; Invoked by Motion. The continuing jurisdiction of the court shall be invoked by motion filed in the original proceeding, notice of which shall be served in the manner provided for the service of process. Juv.R. 16 incorporates the requirements of Civil Rules 4 through 4.6 governing the service of process. - 4 - The service requirements for invoking the continuing jurisdiction of the juvenile court under Juv.R. 35(A) in a case after the entry of a final judgment are identical to those in domestic relations cases under Civ.R. 75(I). It is well established that courts lack continuing jurisdiction to modify prior orders when these requirements for service of motions to modify have not been satisfied. In re Miller (1986), 33 Ohio App.3d 224, 225-227 (juvenile court); Hansen v. Hansen (1985), 21 Ohio App.3d 216, 218-219 (domestic relations court). Judgments rendered without obtaining personal jurisdiction, through proper service of process or an appearance by the nonmoving party, are nullities and void ab initio. Id.; Satava v. Gerhard (1990), 66 Ohio App.3d 598, 601; Rondy v. Rondy (1983), 13 Ohio App.3d 19, 21-22. The record sub judice contains no indication that Ayers was served a copy of George Thomas' post-judgment motion or entered an appearance following the motion in these two cases. George Thomas requested the clerk of court serve his motion by certified mail. The clerk, however, did not record such mailing and the record does not contain a certified mail certificate signed by Ayers indicating completed service. There is no evidence to demonstrate that service on Ayers was completed in any other manner. As a result, the juvenile court lacked jurisdiction to render judgment, and its June 6, 1994, judgment entries must be vacated in these two cases. Accordingly, Ayers' first and second assignments of error are well taken. - 5 - Ayers' third assignment of error follows: THE JUVENILE COURT COMMITTED PREJUDICIAL ERROR BY ISSUING THE JUDGMENT WITHOUT EVIDENCE AND WITHOUT A FINDING OF CONTEMPT AGAINST APPELLANT. Ayers' third assignment of error is overruled as moot. Ayers argues the juvenile court improperly ordered her to pay $3,000 in attorney fees incurred by George Thomas. This argument is moot, however, in light of our disposition of Ayers' first two assignments of error, and we decline to address this assignment of error pursuant to App.R. 12(A)(1)(c). Accordingly, Ayers' third assignment of error is overruled as moot. The June 6, 1994, judgment entries of the juvenile court in these two cases are hereby vacated as nullities. Judgment accordingly. - 6 - It is, therefore, ordered that appellant recover of appellee her costs herein taxed. It is ordered that a special mandate be sent to said court to carry this judgment into execution. A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. PATTON, C.J., and LEO M. SPELLACY, J., CONCUR. DIANE KARPINSKI JUDGE N.B. This entry is made pursuant to the third sentence of Rule 22(D), Ohio Rules of Appellate Procedure. This is an announcement of decision (see Rule 26). Ten (10) days from the date hereof, this document will be stamped to indicate journalization, at which time it will become the judgment and .