COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT
 
                      COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA
 
                           NO. 85578
 
 
MICHELLE SPENCE               :
                              :
          Plaintiff-Appellant :
                              :         JOURNAL ENTRY
                              :
    vs.                       :              and
                              :
                              :            OPINION
                              :
DUANE SPENCE                  :
                              :
          Defendant-Appellee :
 
 
 
DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT
OF DECISION:                      August 4, 2005
 
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING:          Civil appeal from
                                  Common Pleas Court
                                  Domestic Relations Division
                                  Case No. DR-193856
 
JUDGMENT:                         DISMISSED
 
DATE OF JOURNALIZATION:           _______________________
 
APPEARANCES:
 
For Plaintiff-Appellant:          BRENT L. ENGLISH
                                  1500 West Third Street, #470
                                  Cleveland, Ohio 44113-1422
 
For Defendant-Appellee:           DAVID L. LASH
                                  23811 Chagrin Boulevard, #228
                                  Beachwood, Ohio 44122
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                -2-
 
COLLEEN CONWAY COONEY, J.:
 
     Plaintiff-appellant, Michelle Spence ("Spence"), appeals the
 
trial court's decision denying her motions to show cause and for
 
attorney fees. For the reasons discussed below, we dismiss for lack
 
of a final appealable order.
 
     In October 2004, the trial court issued a judgment entry
 
adopting the magistrate's decision which denied Spence's motions to
 
show cause and for attorney fees. Spence filed a timely request
 
for findings of fact and conclusions of law under Civ.R. 52. Prior
 
to the trial court's ruling on the request, Spence filed her notice
 
of appeal.
 
     When a party has timely filed a motion for findings of fact
 
and conclusions of law and such motion has not been ruled upon by
 
the trial court before a party files a notice of appeal, no final
 
appealable order exists from which to appeal.    Rausch v. Rausch,
 
Cuyahoga App. No. 85600, 2005-Ohio-3730, citing Walker v. Doup
 
(1988), 36 Ohio St.3d 229, 522 N.E.2d 1072. See, also,       In re
 
adoption of Gibson (1986), 23 Ohio St.3d 170, 173, 492 N.E.2d 146;
 
In re T.W., Cuyahoga App. No. 85559, 2005-Ohio-3128;    Messina v.
 
Good Times Cafe (May 23, 1991), Cuyahoga App. Nos. 58576, 58577,
 
58873.
 
     Therefore, because Spence's request for findings of fact and
 
conclusions of law is still pending before the trial court, this
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                -3-
 
court is without jurisdiction to consider Spence's appeal regarding
 
the October judgment entry.
 
    Case dismissed for lack of a final appealable order.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                  -4-
 
     It is, therefore, considered that said appellant pay the costs
 
herein.
 
     It is ordered that a special mandate be sent to the Domestic
 
Relations Division of the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas 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.
 
 
 
JAMES J. SWEENEY, P.J. and
 
ANTHONY O. CALABRESE, JR., J. CONCUR
 
 
 
                                                JUDGE
                                         COLLEEN CONWAY COONEY
 
 
 
 
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).
 
.