State ex rel. Richard v. Seidner

Supreme Court of Ohio · Decided 1996-07-24

Cited by 231 later decision(s) in our corpus · see the citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

From the opinion

Per Curiam. Richard asserts in his sole proposition of law that the court of appeals erred in overruling his Civ.R. 60(B) motion for relief from judgment without conducting an evidentiary hearing, because a genuine material dispute appears in the record. In an appeal from a Civ.R. 60(B) determination, a reviewing court must determine whether the trial court abused its discretion. Rose Chevrolet,…

Read the full opinion (source) ↗


Lexace provides legal information, not legal advice, and no attorney–client relationship is created. Citation figures are counts of later citing opinions in our corpus and may be incomplete; always read and Shepardize the full opinion before relying on it.