2022 Ohio 599
Ohio Ct. App.2022Background
- Patricia filed for divorce from Richard; parties signed an Agreed Entry on Divorce and the trial court journalized a decree in Jan. 2020.
- The decree awarded Patricia 50% of Richard’s OPERS account (marital portion for marriage dates) and 50% of his IRA; Patricia was to pay DOPO preparation costs.
- After engaging counsel to draft the DOPO, Patricia learned OPERS would not pay a lump sum—she would receive a share of monthly pension payments only after Richard’s retirement, and payments could cease on his death absent joint-and-survivor election.
- Patricia moved under Civ.R. 60(B) to modify the divorce decree to require Richard to cooperate with her obtaining life insurance on him and to elect a joint-and-survivor benefit for Patricia’s marital interest.
- The trial court issued a DOPO that OPERS initially rejected for a clerical issue; the court denied Patricia’s 60(B) motion, finding R.C. 3105.171(I) barred modification of property division without both spouses’ consent.
- Patricia appealed; the First District affirmed, holding R.C. 3105.171(I) precluded the requested modification and R.C. 3105.89 did not provide an applicable exception.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred by denying Civ.R. 60(B) relief to modify a property-division term of the divorce decree | Patricia: Civ.R. 60(B) relief is available to correct mutual mistake and R.C. 3105.171(I) does not bar such relief; alternatively R.C. 3105.89 allows modification/enforcement | Richard: R.C. 3105.171(I) bars modification of a property division absent both spouses' written consent; no consent here | Court: Affirmed trial court — R.C. 3105.171(I) prevents modifying a property division without both spouses' consent; Civ.R. 60(B) cannot circumvent that bar and R.C. 3105.89 did not apply to the decree at issue |
Key Cases Cited
- Walsh v. Walsh, 136 N.E.3d 460 (Ohio 2019) (Supreme Court of Ohio: Civ.R. 60(B) cannot be used to evade R.C. 3105.171(I)’s prohibition on modifying property divisions absent both spouses’ consent)
- Ouellette v. Ouellette, 152 N.E.3d 528 (Ohio Ct. App. 2020) (trial court lacked authority to modify a divorce decree dividing OPERS without spouse consent; R.C. 3105.89 does not authorize modifying the decree itself)