COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA NO. 72224 EQUIBANK : JOURNAL ENTRY : AND Plaintiff-appellee : OPINION : -vs- : : GEORGE RIVERA, ET AL. : : Defendants-appellants: DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT OF DECISION: JANUARY 22, 1998 CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Civil appeal from the Court of Common Pleas Case No. CV-190426 JUDGMENT: DISMISSED. DATE OF JOURNALIZATION: APPEARANCES: For Plaintiff-Appellee: For Defendants-Appellants: PHYLLIS A. ULRICH, ESQ. ALEXANDER JURCZENKO, ESQ. CARLISLE, MCNELLIE & RINI 1750 Standard Building 25200 Chagrin Blvd., Suite 240 1370 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44122-5681 Cleveland, Ohio 44113 RICHARD AGOPIAN, ESQ. 800 Standard Building 1370 Ontario Street Cleveland, Ohio 44113 DYKE, P.J.: Appellant, Zaida Rivera, appeals the trial court's orders overruling defendant-appellant's objection to confirmation of -2- Sheriff's sale, and confirming the Sheriff's sale. We find that this appeal is moot, and grant appellee's motion to dismiss this appeal. Plaintiff-Appellee, Equibank, initiated a foreclosure action of the interests in real property belonging to George Rivera1 and Zaida Rivera, located at 8407 Brinsmade Avenue in Cleveland, Ohio. The answer asserted one affirmative defense, namely that plaintiff- appellee failed to comply with law and regulation promulgated by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. On January 18, 1991, the court entered summary judgment in favor of plaintiff-appellee, stating, This cause came on to be heard and was submitted to the Court upon the Complaint, Motion for Summary Judgment, . . . the Answer of the Defendants . . . and the evidence. The judgment entry stated that plaintiff was entitled to payment of the debt and foreclosure. Two appraisals were conducted, on 12-30-93 and 10-27-95, appraising the value of the property at $30,000. These appraisals were not used because bankruptcy stays were filed. The stay was vacated and the property was appraised again on October 10, 1996 for $39,000. On February 3, 1997, the Sheriff's sale was held. The property was purchased by Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, assignee in interest to Equibank, for $32,550.00. Appellant filed an objection to the confirmation of the Sheriff's sale. Appellant asserted that the appraisal did not 1 Defendant George Rivera is not a party in this appeal. -3- comply with R.C. 2329.17. The trial court overruled the objection and issued an order of confirmation. Appellant appealed on March 24, 1997, but did not file a motion to stay confirmation of the sale. On April 23, 1997, the Sheriff's Deed was recorded by Equibank with the Cuyahoga County Recorder. Appellant appealed the order of confirmation of the Sheriff's sale. Appellant never appealed the judgment entry of foreclosure dated January 18, 1991. The order of foreclosure is a final appealable order. Third National Bank of Circleville v. Speakman (1985), 18 Ohio St.3d 119, 120, Oberlin Savings Bank Co. V. Fairchild (1963), 175 Ohio St. 311, Bank One Dayton v. Ellington (1995), 105 Ohio App.3d 13. The time for appealing the judgment entry of foreclosure has expired. See App. R. 4. The only order appealed is the order of confirmation of the Sheriff's sale. See BankOne Dayton, supra. Appellant never moved to stay the confirmation. The property has been sold and the deed has been recorded. The order of confirmation has been carried out to its fullest extent. If this court reversed the order of confirmation, there is no relief that can be afforded to appellants. An appeal is moot if it is impossible for the appellate court to grant any effectual relief. Miner v. Witt (1910), 82 Ohio St. 237. If the order of foreclosure were appealed, the appeal may not be moot, even though the sale had been confirmed. See MIF Realty L.P. v. K.E.J. Corp. (May 19, 1995), Wood App. No. 94WD059, -4- unreported. R.C. 2329.45 provides that if the judgment of foreclosure is reversed, the purchaser retains title and the creditor must pay restitution to the debtor. If the judgment of foreclosure was void then the sale must be set aside. Heatherstone Homeowners Assn. v. Conrad (1983), 10 Ohio Misc.2d 18. In this case, the judgment of foreclosure was not appealed, so the above relief can not be granted. We note that the judgement entry of foreclosure was not void, as asserted by appellant. Appellant argued that her affirmative defense was not considered, but the judgment entry of foreclosure indicates otherwise. Accordingly, we grant appellee's motion to dismiss this appeal. -5- It is ordered that appellee recover of appellants its costs herein taxed. A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. Exceptions. NAHRA, J., AND SPELLACY, J., CONCUR. ANN DYKE 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 .