FIRST DISTRICT

COURT OF APPEALS

        

THESE SUMMARIES ARE NEITHER APPROVED IN ADVANCE NOR ENDORSED BY THE COURT.  THEY ARE NOT HEADNOTES OR SYLLABI.  INTERESTED PARTIES SHOULD OBTAIN COPIES OF THE ACTUAL DECISIONS FROM THE CLERK OF THE COURT OF APPEALS.

 

DATE: Friday, March 7, 2025

CAPTION: GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY V. FALAH

APPEAL NO.: C-240332 

TRIAL NO.: A-2300869

KEY WORDS: CIV.R. 60(B) — MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT — AFFIDAVIT — EXCUSABLE NEGLECT — ABUSE OF DISCRETION

SUMMARY: Where defendant submitted an affidavit in support of a Civ.R. 60(B) motion for relief from judgment, there was evidence in the record to support the trial court’s entry granting the motion.

Where the record contained evidence in support of a motion for relief from judgment in the form of an affidavit, and where the party opposing the motion failed to respond, failed to raise a challenge to the credibility of the statements in the affidavit, and failed to request the opportunity to present its own evidence, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in failing to take additional evidence before ruling on the motion.

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in failing to issue findings of fact in support of its ruling on a Civ.R. 60(B) motion for relief from judgment, particularly where no such request was made by a party pursuant to the Rules of Civil Procedure.

Where defendant admitted receiving service of the complaint, contacted counsel for plaintiff to tell counsel that defendant had not been involved in the automobile accident that was the subject of the complaint, failed to receive a response from plaintiff’s counsel, and failed to respond to the complaint based on a belief that it was a scam, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding the presence of excusable neglect and in granting defendant’s Civ.R. 60(B) motion for relief from judgment.

JUDGMENT: AFFIRMED 

JUDGES: OPINION by CROUSE, J.; KINSLEY, P.J., and BOCK, J., CONCUR.