party answers out rule (Ohio) · Go Syfert
← Ohio issues

party answers out rule in Ohio

5 Ohio opinions name it 1 courts 2001–2023 1 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Ohio courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
Marion Production Credit Ass'n v. Cochrangreen
ohio · 1988 · cited in 2 Ohio opinions naming this issue, 2001–2003
2 sentences

2003See Marion Production Credit Assn. v. Cochran (1988), 40 Ohio St.3d 265 , 272 ("[u]ntil a motion for default is filed, it is presumed that the complaining party is not entitled to a default judgment, which fact serves to enlarge the discretion of the trial court to allowed a delayed responsive pleading"); Fowler, supra ("[w]hen a party answers out of rule but before a default is entered, if the answer is in good form and substance, a default should not be entered").

2001In Evans v. Chapman (1986), 28 Ohio St.3d 132 , 135 , the Ohio Supreme Court held that a trial court did not err in granting appellee's motion for leave to file an answer brief over thirty days late, "especially in light of the fact that no default motion was pending at the time." See, also, Marion Production Credit Assn. v. Cochran (1988), 40 Ohio St.3d 265 , 272 ("of great importance, is the fact that the [plaintiffs] failed to file their motion for default until after [defendant] pointed out the lack of a reply in its motion *** for leave to file a reply instanter. *** Until a motion for de

12

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Ohio. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (6)

CaseCitedYears
New v. All Transportation Solution, Inc. green
ohioctapp · 2008
1 sentence

2023Solution, Inc., 177 Ohio App.3d 620 , 2008- Ohio-3949, ¶ 14 (10th Dist.). “ ‘When a party answers out of rule but before a default [judgment] is entered, if the answer is good in form and substance, a default should not be entered.’ ” Washington v. Ohio Adult Parole Auth., 10th Dist.

12023–2023
Albright v. Cincinnati Equitable Ins., Unpublished Decision (8-2-2004) neutral
ohioctapp · 2004
1 sentence

2013Crawford No. 3-04-01, 2004-Ohio-4010, ¶ 21 .

12013–2013
Mendise v. Plain Dealer Publishing Co. green
ohioctapp · 1990
1 sentence

2001Corp. v. Dry Cleaning Computer Sys., Inc. (1993), 90 Ohio App.3d 181 , 186 ; Mendise v. Plain Dealer Publishing Co. (1990), 69 Ohio App.3d 721 , 724 ; Suki v. Blume (1983), 9 Ohio App.3d 289 .

12001–2001
Evans v. Chapman green
ohio · 1986
1 sentence

2001In Evans v. Chapman (1986), 28 Ohio St.3d 132 , 135 , the Ohio Supreme Court held that a trial court did not err in granting appellee's motion for leave to file an answer brief over thirty days late, "especially in light of the fact that no default motion was pending at the time." See, also, Marion Production Credit Assn. v. Cochran (1988), 40 Ohio St.3d 265 , 272 ("of great importance, is the fact that the [plaintiffs] failed to file their motion for default until after [defendant] pointed out the lack of a reply in its motion *** for leave to file a reply instanter. *** Until a motion for de

12001–2001
Miami System Corp. v. Dry Cleaning Computer Systems, Inc. green
ohioctapp · 1993
1 sentence

2001Corp. v. Dry Cleaning Computer Sys., Inc. (1993), 90 Ohio App.3d 181 , 186 ; Mendise v. Plain Dealer Publishing Co. (1990), 69 Ohio App.3d 721 , 724 ; Suki v. Blume (1983), 9 Ohio App.3d 289 .

12001–2001
Suki v. Blume green
ohioctapp · 1983
1 sentence

2001Corp. v. Dry Cleaning Computer Sys., Inc. (1993), 90 Ohio App.3d 181 , 186 ; Mendise v. Plain Dealer Publishing Co. (1990), 69 Ohio App.3d 721 , 724 ; Suki v. Blume (1983), 9 Ohio App.3d 289 .

12001–2001

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check