COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT
                       COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
                            NO. 78194
OHIO BULK TRANSFER CO., INC.  :
                              :
          Plaintiff-appellant :
                              :          JOURNAL ENTRY
     vs.                      :               and
                              :             OPINION
S.E. JOHNSON COMPANIES, INC.  :
                              :
          Defendant-appellee  :
                              :
DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT
OF DECISION                   :    APRIL 26, 2001
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING       :    Civil appeal from
                              :    Court of Common Pleas
                              :    Case No. 392,661
JUDGMENT                      :    DISMISSED.
DATE OF JOURNALIZATION        :
APPEARANCES:
For plaintiff-appellant:      MARVIN L. KARP
                              STUART A. LAVIN
                              EDWARD P. SIMMS
                              Attorneys at Law
                              Ulmer & Berne
                              900 Bond Court Building
                              1300 East Ninth Street
                              Cleveland, Ohio 44114-1583
(Continued)
                               -2-
APPEARANCES (Continued):
For defendant-appellee:       JACK ZOUHARY
                              Attorney at Law
                              S.E. Johnson Companies, Inc.
                              1345 Ford Street
                              P.O. Box 29A
                              Maumee, Ohio 43537
                               -3-
KENNETH A. ROCCO, J.:
     This case is before  the court on appeal from a  purportedly
final judgment for defendant-appellee S.E. Johnson Companies, Inc.
following a jury trial.  Appellant's sole assignment of error con-
tends that the trial court erred by granting Johnson's motion for
a directed verdict as  to plaintiff-appellant's claim for  unjust
enrichment.
     On March 2, 2001, this court entered an order directing  the
trial court to supplement the record with a signed and journalized
entry documenting its oral ruling directing the verdict for Johnson
on the unjust enrichment claim.  The trial court has not complied
with this order to date,  although it was directed to return  the
corrected record to this court within thirty days.
     A court of record speaks only through its journal, not by oral
pronouncements.  Schenley v. Kauth (1953), 160 Ohio St. 109, para-
graph one of the syllabus.  Under Civ.R. 58(A),  [a] judgment  is
effective only when entered by the clerk upon the journal.   Here,
there is no entry granting judgment on appellant's claim for unjust
enrichment. As this is the only purportedly final order challenged
by appellant's assignments of error,1 we must dismiss this appeal
for lack of a  final order. See Production Credit Association  v.
Dryak (June 13, 1988), Highland App. No. 633, unreported.
     1The trial court made no determination that there was no just
reason for delay in entering final judgment on the jury's verdict.
Hence, its  entry on the  jury's verdict also  was not final  and
appealable pursuant to Civ.R. 54(B).
                               -4-
     Appeal dismissed.
                               -5-
     This cause is dismissed.
     It is, therefore, considered  that said appellee recover  of
said appellant its costs herein.
     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.
DIANE KARPINSKI, A.J.       and
PATRICIA A. BLACKMON, J. CONCUR
                                              JUDGE
                                        KENNETH A. ROCCO
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. 22.  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
clerk  per App.R.  22(E).   See, also,  S.Ct.Prac.R. II,  Section
2(A)(1).
 
.