Davis v. Davis
2016 Ohio 7790
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Carmen Davis filed a Civ.R. 60(B)(5) motion in 2015 seeking modification of a 2010 divorce decree (spousal support, marital residence, pensions, child support, transportation, medical coverage, tax exemptions).
- The 2010 decree included a shared parenting plan signed by both parties.
- Joseph Davis moved to dismiss Carmen’s 60(B) motion; the trial court continued and later heard the matter.
- The trial court denied Carmen’s motion in an October 28, 2015 entry, finding her claims nonspecific, unsupported by evidence or law, not timely, and essentially relitigation of the divorce.
- Carmen appealed, assigning error for denial without a hearing and for granting a procedurally deficient motion to dismiss.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Davis) | Defendant's Argument (Carmen) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court abused discretion by denying Civ.R. 60(B)(5) relief without a hearing | Denial was proper because Carmen failed to show meritorious defense, timeliness, or unusual circumstances | Carmen argued she was entitled to relief under the catch‑all provision and to a hearing | Court affirmed denial: Carmen failed to plead operative facts, show meritorious defense, or unusual/extraordinary circumstances; no hearing required |
| Whether the court erred by granting plaintiff’s motion to dismiss as procedurally deficient | Dismissal/motion sought resolution of Carmen’s 60(B) motion | Carmen contended the motion was procedurally deficient and should not have been granted | Issue rendered moot: denial of Carmen’s 60(B) motion was dispositive; the “motion to dismiss” functioned as opposition |
Key Cases Cited
- Argo Plastic Products Co. v. Cleveland, 15 Ohio St.3d 389 (Ohio 1984) (standards for Civ.R. 60(B) motions and requirements for relief)
- GTE Automatic Elec. v. ARC Industries, 47 Ohio St.2d 146 (Ohio 1976) (formulation of Civ.R. 60(B) elements)
- Griffey v. Rajan, 33 Ohio St.3d 75 (Ohio 1987) (abuse-of-discretion standard for postjudgment motions)
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (Ohio 1983) (definition of abuse of discretion)
- Caruso-Ciresi, Inc. v. Lohman, 5 Ohio St.3d 64 (Ohio 1983) (scope of Civ.R. 60(B)(5) as court’s inherent power)
- Kay v. Marc Glassman, Inc., 76 Ohio St.3d 18 (Ohio 1996) (movant must allege operative facts to warrant a Civ.R. 60(B) hearing)