Bryan Heim and The Indianapolis Yacht Club v. Michael L. Wallace (mem. dec.)
29A02-1703-SC-611
| Ind. Ct. App. | Nov 14, 2017Background
- Wallace filed a small-claims action against Heim and the Indianapolis Yacht Club (IYC), alleging Heim had possession of Wallace’s jet ski after IYC removed it from Wallace’s slip.
- Service of the notice of claim was recorded as left at Heim’s residence and at IYC on June 21, 2016. Wallace did not mail a copy to Heim by first-class mail (per Heim’s later claim).
- Heim was represented by counsel (Theodore Minch), who filed a general appearance and a “Notice of Ineffective Service,” and sought to defend service at the rescheduled November 2016 hearing.
- At the November 2016 hearing the trial court found service effective, heard Wallace’s claim on the merits, and ordered Heim to return the jet ski to Wallace within seven days; Heim’s counsel did not present evidence on the merits or move for continuance.
- Heim moved for relief from judgment under Trial Rule 60(B), asserting lack of personal jurisdiction due to ineffective service and that he lawfully owned the jet ski; the trial court denied relief and Heim appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court lacked personal jurisdiction due to ineffective service | Wallace contends service was proper as recorded | Heim contends service was ineffective because a mailed copy was not sent to his residence as required by Small Claims Rule 3(A) | Court rejected Heim’s claim: he was represented at the hearing, failed to raise the specific mailing argument below, and thus waived it; no jurisdictional defect shown |
| Whether denial of 60(B) relief was erroneous | Wallace implicitly argues denial proper because no extraordinary grounds showing | Heim argues 60(B) relief warranted due to lack of personal jurisdiction and newly presented ownership evidence | Court affirmed denial: 60(B) is for procedural/equitable grounds, not re-litigating merits; Heim had opportunity to present evidence at the November hearing and did not; no abuse of discretion |
| Whether Heim’s ownership claim warranted reopening the judgment | Wallace maintained judgment on merits after hearing | Heim says he lawfully possessed/owned the jet ski and should be allowed to present evidence | Court held Heim waived the chance to introduce evidence at the merits hearing and cannot get a “second bite”; merits not a proper basis under 60(B) here |
| Whether a notice of ineffective service filed by counsel preserved appellate review | Wallace relied on hearing record | Heim relied on counsel’s Notice of Ineffective Service | Court found counsel’s notice was unsigned (invalid) and, in any event, counsel litigated service at hearing but failed to present the mailing argument, so appellate review not preserved |
Key Cases Cited
- Z.S. v. J.F., 918 N.E.2d 636 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (Trial Rule 60(B) relief applies only in extraordinary, non-fault circumstances)
- In re Paternity of P.S.S., 934 N.E.2d 737 (Ind. 2010) (60(B) addresses procedural/equitable grounds for relief from final judgments, not merits)
- Thomison v. IK Indy, Inc., 858 N.E.2d 1052 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) (ineffective service of process defeats personal jurisdiction; party challenging jurisdiction bears burden)
- Laflamme v. Goodwin, 911 N.E.2d 660 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (appellate court may reverse for prima facie error when appellee does not file a brief)
- Dedelow v. Pucalik, 801 N.E.2d 178 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003) (issues not raised in the trial court are generally waived on appeal)