Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Rebecca Pearson v. Glenn Pearson

September 26, 2011

REBECCA PEARSON APPELLANT
v.
GLENN PEARSON APPELLEE



APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS COUNTY OF MEDINA, OHIO CASE No. 06DR0567

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Moore, Judge.

Cite as

Pearson v. Pearson,

ss:

DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY

{¶1} Appellant, Rebecca Pearson, appeals from the judgment of the Medina County Court of Common Pleas, Domestic Relations Division. This Court affirms.

I.

{¶2} On September 14, 2006, Appellant, Rebecca Pearson ("Wife") filed a complaint for divorce from her husband, Appellee, Glenn Pearson ("Husband"). On September 26, 2006, Husband filed an answer and counterclaim. After the parties conducted discovery the trial court referred the matter to mediation. Later, the matter was stayed for a lengthy period of time due to bankruptcy proceedings. After numerous status reviews, on May 21, 2009, the magistrate entered an order that scheduled the uncontested divorce hearing for July 15, 2009, at 3:00 p.m. Wife failed to appear for the hearing. At that time, the magistrate conducted a hearing at which Husband and Kurt Card testified. On August 10, 2009, the magistrate issued a decision that granted the parties a divorce and included a shared parenting plan.

{¶3} On August 18, 2009, Wife filed a pro se objection to the magistrate's decision that included an argument that she was unaware of the July 15, 2009 hearing. On August 19, 2009, a notice of hearing was filed and indicated that a hearing on Wife's objections to the magistrate's decision was scheduled for October 28, 2009, at 1:30 p.m. On November 18, 2009, another notice of hearing was filed and indicated that a hearing on Wife's objections to the magistrate's decision was scheduled for December 16, 2009, at 9:00 a.m. On December 30, 2009, Wife's counsel, retained for the October 28, 2009 hearing on Wife's objections, filed a "motion to supplement objections filed by [Wife] dated August 16, 2009/motion for relief pursuant to Rule 75F of the Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure/motion pursuant to rules 60(B)(1) & 60(B)(5)." Attached to that motion was an affidavit of Wife averring that she had no counsel at the time of the divorce hearing and that she did not receive notice of the hearing. On May 24, 2010, the trial judge filed a judgment entry that overruled Wife's objections, adopted the magistrate's decision, and separately entered judgment.

{¶4} Wife timely filed a notice of appeal. She raises one assignment of error for our review.

II.

ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR

"[WIFE] ASSERTS THAT SHE WAS DENIED MINIMAL DUE PROCESS BASED UPON THE FAILURE OF THE COURT TO NOTIFY HER OF THE 'UNCONTESTED FINAL HEARING SCHEDULED AND HEARD ON JULY 15TH, 2009.' [WIFE] ASSERTS THAT THE

FAILURE OF THE COURT TO NOTIFY HER OF THAT HEARING DENIED HER OF THE MINIMAL DUE PROCESS TO WHICH SHE WAS ENTITLED. THE TRIAL COURT'S FAILURE TO OVERRULE THE MAGISTRATE'S ORDER, IN ITS JUDGMENT ENTRY OF MAY 24TH, 2010, ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.