Schrader v. Schrader, 2012 Ohio 4032

Marriage on June 17, 2000; no children born of the marriage.
Wife filed for divorce November 2, 2010; temporary support and obligations issued November 30, 2010.
Final hearing held June 9, 2011; draft separation agreement discussed and amended outside clients' presence.
Separation Agreement language about division of sale proceeds was altered by Husband’s attorney interlineations; parties signed the changes.
Judgment Entry granting divorce entered June 21, 2011; Wife later moved for relief from judgment under Civ.R.60(A)/(B) asserting mutual mistake; trial court denied relief January 12, 2012; Wife appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Civ.R.60 relief for mutual mistake allowed?	Schrader argues clerical mistake; interlineations reflect mutual intent.	Schrader contends no clerical error; interlineations reflect substantive change.	Sustained; error deemed clerical, warranting relief.
Was the trial court correct to adopt Husband’s memorandum without explanation?	Wife asserts need for further explanation of denial.	Husband's memorandum supported denial of relief; no additional explanation required.	Sustained; remanded for explanation consistent with ruling.
Is the equity claim barred by res judicata?	Wife contends equitable division merits review.	Husband argues res judicata bars post-decree equity challenge.	Overruled; court held this argument barred by res judicata.

Londrico v. Delores C. Knowlton, Inc., 88 Ohio App.3d 282 (1993) (clerical mistake limited to transcription/omission errors)
Dentsply Internatl., Inc. v. Kostas, 26 Ohio App.3d 116 (1985) (errors in documents handled by clerks; definition of clerical mistake)
Shover v. Cordis Corp., 61 Ohio St.3d 213 (1991) (illustrative cautionary quote on equitable outcomes)
Dincher v. Marlin Firearms Co., 198 F.2d 821 (2d Cir. 1952) (cited regarding analytical approach to marital settlement drafting)