COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO  EIGHTH DISTRICT
                       COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
                            NO. 72752
IN THE MATTER OF
AUDREE CALHOUN-COMACK              :      ACCELERATED DOCKET
                                   :
{Cuyahoga Support Enforcement      :         JOURNAL ENTRY
Agency              Appellant}     :
                                   :              AND
                                   :
                                   :            OPINION
                                               PER CURIAM
DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT
OF DECISION:                       NOVEMBER 13, 1997
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING:           Civil appeal from Juvenile
                                   Court Case No. 9770059
JUDGMENT:                          APPEAL DISMISSED.
DATE OF JOURNALIZATION:
APPEARANCES:
For Appellant:                     STEPHANIE TUBBS JONES
                                   Cuyahoga County Prosecutor
                                   MATTHEW RAZAVI
                                   SHARON HAWK
                                   Assistant County Prosecutors
                                   P.O. Box 93894
                                   Cleveland, Ohio 44101-5894
For Appellee Victor N. Grays:      VICTOR N. GRAYS
                                   4002 Lancaster Road #2
                                   South Euclid, Ohio 44121
                                2
PER CURIAM:
     The Cuyahoga County Child Support Enforcement Agency appeals
from a  decision  of the  Cuyahoga  County Juvenile  Court  which
modified the child  support obligation of  Victor Grays, Sr,  the
father of  Victor Norman Grays,  Jr., who is  the minor child  of
Audree Calhoun-Comack.  Because that  agency has  no standing  to
appeal, we dismiss this matter.
     The pertinent case history reveals that on October 17, 1996,
after conducting an administrative hearing, CSEA determined Victor
Grays,  Sr.  to  be  the  father  of  Victor  Norman  Grays,  and
subsequently, on December  4, 1996, ordered  Grays to pay  Comack
$500.17 per month as child support.
     Thereafter, on January 27,  1997, fifty-four days after  the
support order had been  issued, Grays filed a motion in  juvenile
court  to  modify  the child  support  order,  naming  Comack  as
respondent, but neither naming  CESA as a party, nor giving  that
agency notice of  the proceedings.   A juvenile court  magistrate
heard  the matter  on April  11, 1997,  adopted CESA's  paternity
determination, but modified its support order to $163.16 biweekly.
The court approved that decision in its May 19, 1997 journal entry.
     CESA now appeals from the court's order and assigns two error
for  our review,  alleging that  Grays should  have requested  an
administrative review with CSEA in accordance with R.C. 3111.22 and
that  the  court  should  have  notified  CSEA  of  the   pending
modification request in conformity with R.C. 3113.21(G)(5).
     Before considering these  assignments of error, however,  we
                                3
concern ourselves with  the issue of the appellant's standing  to
prosecute  this  appeal since  CSEA  was  never a  party  to  the
proceedings in the juvenile court and the record does not  reveal
that agency ever moved to intervene.
     The  Ohio Supreme Court  held in State,  ex rel. Lipson,  v.
Hunter, Bldg. Commr. (1965), 2 Ohio St.2d 255, that a person  who
has not  attempted to intervene  as a party  in action below,  is
without capacity to appeal.  See also Januzzi v. Hickman (1991), 61
Ohio St.3d 40.
     In addition, the United Supreme Court held in Marino v. Ortiz
(1988), 484 U.S. 301, at 304:
     ***that  because petitioners  were not  parties to  the
     underlying lawsuit, and because they failed to intervene
     for purposes of  appeal, they may  not appeal from  the
     consent decree approving that lawsuit's settlement***.
     Here, because CESA never became a party to the proceedings and
never attempted to intervene in the trial court, in conformity with
State, ex rel. Lipson, supra, that agency is without capacity  to
appeal the court's determination in this case.  Thus, this appeal
must be dismissed.
     Appeal dismissed.
     It is ordered  that appellee recover of appellant its  costs
herein taxed.
     A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate
pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.
                                4
                              ___________________________________
                              TERRENCE O'DONNELL, PRESIDING JUDGE
presiding judge~
                              ___________________________________
                              TIMMOTHY E. McMONAGLE, JUDGE
                              ___________________________________
                              LEO M. SPELLACY, JUDGE
N.B.  This entry is an announcement of the court's decision.  See
App.R. 22(B), 22(D) and 26(A); Loc.App.R. 27.  This decision will
be journalized and will become the judgment and order of the court
pursuant to App.R. 22(E) unless a motion for  reconsideration with
supporting brief, per App.R. 26(A), is filed within ten (10) days
of the announcement of the court's decision.  The time period for
review by the Supreme Court of  Ohio shall begin to run upon  the
journalization of  this court's announcement  of decision by  the
.