Motion for Relief from Judgment

You discover that a judgment was erroneously taken against you. What do you do? Courts will permit a party to seek relief from a judgment taken against them if certain criteria are met. Under Rule 60 of the Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure (a set of rules that all courts and lawyers must follow to pursue or in relief from a legal claim) sets forth the rules by which a party may seek to reopen a lawsuit. While Rule 60 is a rather small bit of judicial legislation, consisting of a mere two paragraphs, it has sired a huge amount of litigation.

Rule 60 is divided into two parts. The first, subsection A, relates to “clerical errors” by the court. Basically, if there is an error or omission in an entry by the court the party or the court, on its own motion, may seek to correct that error.

Subsection B, relating to non-court errors has grown to be the most controversial. That section, known as Rule 60(B) states:

“On motion and upon such terms as are just, the court may relieve a party or his legal representative from a final judgment, order or proceeding for the following reasons: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence which by due diligence could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under Rule 59(B); (3) fraud (whether heretofore denominated intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation or other misconduct of an adverse party; (4) the judgment has been satisfied, released or discharged, or a prior judgment upon which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated, or it is no longer equitable that the judgment should have prospective application; or (5) any other reason justifying relief from the judgment. The motion shall be made within a reasonable time, and for reasons (1), (2) and (3) not more than one year after the judgment, order or proceeding was entered or taken. A motion under this subdivision (B) does not affect the finality of a judgment or suspend its operation.”

In summary, a party make seek relief from judgment for the following reasons:

1. Mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect.

2. Newly discovered evidence

3. Fraud, misrepresentation or other misconduct by the other party

4. The judgment was satisfied, released or discharged, or

5. Any other reason justifying relief

It would appear that it might be easy to obtain relief. But, this is not true. Pursuant to the landmark case of GTE Automatic Elec., Inc. v. ARC Industries, Inc., 47 Ohio St.2d 146, any party seeking relief from judgment must demonstrate that.

1. The party has a meritorious defense or claim to present if relief is granted,

2. The party is entitled to relief under one of the grounds stated in Civ.R. 60(B), and

3. The motion is made within a reasonable time.

If any of these issues are not demonstrated bythe party, relief will be denied.

Now, you say, that’s easy, I just say I don’t owe it, cite one of the grounds and file it within one year. Not so easy. First, the party must set forth articuable facts to support its “meritorious defense.” A self serving statement that the party does not owe the debt is insufficient. Further, the party must set forth articuable facts to support its grounds for relief. Just a general statement that the judgment was obtained “through fraud” is insufficient. The party must set forth the alleged fraudulent acts of the other party. Finally, the motion must be filed within a “reasonable time.” The party can not sit on their rights. Many courts have denied motions for relief even when the party has filed its motion well within the one years requirement. For example, assuming you learn of this judgment immediately after it is rendered and wait months before filing, many courts have denied the party’s motion as being “not timely filed.”

If the motion survives a preliminary review by the court (after reading the other party’s memorandum in opposition to your motion), the court will schedule a hearing that will require you, the moving party, to demonstrate the merits of your motion. If the court finds you failed to sustain the burden, it can deny your motion.

So, if you find yourself in such a predicament, what should you do? First, you must seek redress with the court immediately. A delay could prove fatal to your motion. Second, if you do file such a motion, you must articulate, in detail, the reasons you seek relief being sure to follow the requirements of GTE Automatic Elec., Inc. v. ARC Industries, Inc, Supra. Third, and most importantly, I strongly suggest you seek benefit of counsel. Rule 60(B) has become a highly litigated section of the Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure. Due to the litiginous nature of this section, it has produced an unusually high number of cited cases that have continued to refine and delineate different case scenarios that are difficult for any layman to research and address.