Harold J. Pohl, Inc. v. Cotterman

Citations

• 2018 Ohio 2660

Syllabus

Trial court did not err when it denied appellant's Civ.R. 60(B) motion for relief from judgment. Appellant failed to argue sufficient operative facts in order to establish a meritorious defense, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion by finding that he failed to establish the first prong of the test for relief pursuant to Civ.R. 60(B). Therefore, the trial court did not err by failing to afford appellant an evidentiary hearing on his motion for relief from judgment. Judgment affirmed.