Court of Appeals of Ohio, First District, Hamilton
JEFFREY A. REESE, Plaintiff-Appellant,
JULIE A REESE, Defendant-Appellee.
Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas, Domestic Relations
Division, TRIAL No. DR1600595
Cordell Law, LLP, and Dorothy Walsh Ripka, for
Law Office, LLC, and Daryle C. Tibbs, for Defendant-Appellee.
Plaintiff-appellant Jeffrey Reese ("Jeff) appeals the
Hamilton County Domestic Relations Court's final entry
issued on December 14, 2017, and the entry granting
plaintiffs "Motion for Relief with Findings of Fact and
Conclusion of Law" entered on May 4, 2018.
In three assignments of error, Jeff argues that the trial
court erred in granting his motion for relief from judgment
based on mistake instead of fraud; the trial court improperly
ordered him to pay a "distributive award" in the
form of a lumpum spousal-support payment; and the trial court
erred when it found that defendant-appellee Julie Reese
("Julie") was not voluntarily underemployed and
ordered Jeff to pay monthly child support.
Facts and Procedure
The parties were married on August 24, 2002. Three children
were born of the marriage. The parties separated on March 23,
2016, and Jeff filed for divorce on April 6, 2016. In August
2017, the Hamilton County Domestic Relations Court ordered
shared parenting of the three children. On November 28, 2017,
the court held a property trial to determine the issues of
equitable property distribution, spousal support, and child
support. The court issued a final entry on December 14, 2017.
As relevant to this appeal, the court ordered Jeff to pay
Julie a lump-sum spousal-support payment in the amount of
$75, 000, and monthly child-support payments in the amount of
$1, 014.50. The court also ordered that the parties'
marital home be sold and the first $118, 223.13 in proceeds
to be paid to Julie's parents as repayment on a loan.
Jeff filed this appeal on February 8, 2018. The following
day, Jeff filed a postdecree motion for relief from judgment
pursuant to Civ.R 60(B) in the trial court, contesting the
grant of marital-home proceeds to Julie's parents. On
March 2, 2018, Jeff filed with this court a "Motion to
Remand to Trial Court Pursuant to Civ.R. 60(B)." On
March 21, 2018, this court granted Jeff's motion and
remanded the matter for the limited purpose of permitting the
trial court to consider Jeff's postdecree motion for
On April 23, 2018, the trial court heard argument on the
postdecree motion for relief from judgment pursuant to Civ.R.
60(B). The trial court issued an entry granting plaintiffs
"Motion for Relief from Judgment Pursuant to Rule
60(B)" on April 24, 2018. Upon Jeff's request, the
trial court subsequently issued an entry granting plaintiffs
motion for relief from judgment pursuant to Civ.R. 60(B) with
findings of fact and conclusion of law on May 4, 2018. Jeff
now appeals both the final entry issued on December 14, 2017,
and the entry granting his motion for relief entered on May
Motion for Relief from Judgment
In his first assignment of error, Jeff argues that the trial
court erred in granting his Civ.R. 60(B) motion for relief
from judgment based on mistake instead of fraud.
During the April 23 hearing on his motion, Jeff asked the
trial court to find he was entitled to relief from judgment
under Civ.R 60(B)(3) based on fraud, misrepresentation, or
misconduct, or, in the alternative, under Civ.R 60(B)(1)
based on mistake. By its May 4 entry, the court concluded
that Jeff was entitled to relief under Civ.R 60(B)(1) based
on the mistaken testimony of Julie and her mother. The court
also granted Jeff attorney fees incurred in pursuit of the
motion for relief.
"[A]n appeal lies only on behalf of a party aggrieved by
the final order appealed from." Ohio Contract
Carriers Assn. v. Pub. Utilities Comm., 140 Ohio St.
160, 42 N.E.2d 758 (1942), paragraph one of the syllabus;
see Young v. Durrani,2016-Ohio-5526, 61 N.E.3d 34,
¶ 17 (1st Dist.). Accordingly, a party who is not
aggrieved or prejudiced by a judgment does not have standing
to appeal. See Young at ¶ 17. Without standing,
a party's ...