Guyer v. Neisler
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as Guyer v. Neisler, 2003-Ohio-895.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT LUCAS COUNTY Courtney Guyer, et al. Court of Appeals No. L-02-1170 Appellants Trial Court No. CI-01-3030 James Neisler, M.D. DECISION AND JUDGMENT ENTRY v. Appellee Decided: February 28, 2003 * * * * * Martin W. Williams, for appellants. Nancy D. Moody, for appellee. * * * * * GLASSER, J. {¶1} This appeal comes to us from a judgment issued by the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas granting a motion to vacate a default judgment entered against appellee. Because we conclude that the trial court properly granted appellee's motion to vacate, we affirm. {¶2} Appellants, in their sole assignment of error, contend that the trial court erred in finding that appellee produced evidence {¶3} that showed excusable neglect justifying relief from the judgment. or any other reason A ruling by a trial court on a Civ.R. 60(B) motion to vacate will be upheld on appeal absent an abuse of discretion. Marion Prod. Credit Assn. v. Cochran (1988), 40 Ohio St.3d 265, 271. {¶4} In considering appellants' assignment of error and supporting arguments, this court reviewed the record of this case and all applicable, relevant law. After doing so, we conclude that the well-reasoned decision of the Honorable Frederick H. McDonald properly determines and correctly disposes of the material issues raised in appellants' assignment of error. decision of the trial court as our We therefore adopt the own. See Appendix A. Accordingly, appellants' sole assignment of error is found not well-taken. {¶5} affirmed. The judgment of the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas is Court costs of this appeal are assessed to appellants. JUDGMENT AFFIRMED. Peter M. Handwork, P.J. ____________________________ JUDGE Richard W. Knepper, J. George M. Glasser, J. CONCUR. ____________________________ JUDGE ____________________________ JUDGE Judge George M. Glasser, retired, sitting by assignment of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Ohio. 2.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
