Proposed amendments to the Rules of Practice of the Supreme Court of Ohio are available for review and comment as the state's high court has announced a public comment period until April 6.

The specific amendment addresses when the clock starts ticking to file an appeal in the Supreme Court after a party seeks a full review by all members of an appeals court. Justices concurred 7-0 in publishing the amendments for public comment, a court statement provided this week.

As a result of the court's decision in McFadden v. Cleveland State Univ., which held that "if the judges of a court of appeals determine that two or more decisions of the court on which they sit are in conflict, they must convene en banc to resolve the conflict," and an amendment to the Rules of Appellate Procedure, Division (A)(5) of S.Ct. Prac. R. 2.2 was proposed to permit a party to file a motion for en banc review with a court of appeals.

The division of the rule will toll the time for filing an appeal to the Supreme Court until the appeals court rules on the en banc motion, the statement detailed.

The following is the language of Section 5 of Division A - Perfection of appeal - as proposed:

(5) (a) When a party timely files a motion for en banc review in the court of appeals pursuant to App. R. 26(A)(2), the time for filing a notice of appeal from the court of appeals opinion and judgment entry shall be tolled.

(b) If a motion for en banc review is filed in the court of appeals, and the appellant seeks to appeal from the court of appeals opinion and judgment entry, the appellant shall file a notice of appeal within forty-five days of the court of appeals decision on the motion for en banc review.

(c) To file an appeal from the court of appeals opinion and judgment entry after the court of appeals has ruled on a motion for en banc review, the appellant shall comply with the timeframe imposed by S.Ct. Prac. R. 2.2(A)(5)(b) and shall include the following:

(i) A notice of appeal that complies with the requirements of S.Ct. Prac. R. 2.2(B), and that indicates both the date of the court of appeals decision on the motion for en banc review, and the date of the court of appeals opinion and judgment entry that is being appealed.

(ii) A memorandum in support of jurisdiction that complies with the requirements of S.Ct. Prac. R. 3.1, and that has attached a date-stamped copy of the court of appeals decision on the motion for en banc review.

Visit the Supreme Court's Web site to view the proposed amendments. Comments on the amendments should be submitted in writing to: Justin Kudela, Case Management Counsel, Supreme Court of Ohio, 65 S. Front St., Eighth Floor, Columbus, OH 43215 or justin.kudela@sc.ohio.gov.