Login | January 21, 2025
10th District Court rejects appeal of Columbus couple in rent dispute
KEITH ARNOLD
Special to the Legal News
Published: January 21, 2025
A Tenth District Court of Appeals panel dismissed a Columbus couple’s challenge to a lower-court ruling that denied their request for a hearing in an eviction action brought by a family member.
The three-judge panel determined that Donald and Michele Neibert’s appeal was premature as there is no final, appealable order resulting from the lower court proceedings.
Tenth District Judge Kristin Boggs wrote that the appellate court lacked jurisdiction to rule on the matter and dismissed the couple’s appeal.
“The judgment denying the Neiberts’ Civ.R. 60(B) motion was not a final, appealable order, as the judgment to which it was addressed––the trial court’s agreed judgment entry adopting the parties’ settlement agreement–– was not a final, appealable order,” Boggs wrote in the 3-0 decision.
According to case background, Michelle Neibert claimed that she and her mother Jannie McCown purchased the property at 961 Clarendon Ave. in Columbus in 2019.
She lived with her mother at the property after the purchase and Donald Neibert moved in with the women in 2021.
Michelle Neibert alleged that there was no lease––written or oral––but she and her husband maintained the property and paid most expenses, summary detailed.
McCown filed an action for forcible entry and detainer against the Neiberts Dec. 12, 2023, alleging in the complaint that she was the property owner and her daughter and son-in-law had entered into a month-to-month, oral lease agreement for $314.55 a month.
The woman further claimed that the Neiberts failed to pay rent in July, August, September, October and November of 2023, and she sought a writ of restitution so she could return to possessing the property.
At an eviction hearing Jan. 3, 2024, at Franklin County Municipal Court, the parties entered into a settlement agreement, which stated that the Neiberts would vacate the residence no later than 11:59 p.m. Feb. 5, 2024, and that if the Neiberts vacated the property by that time, McCown would dismiss the eviction action.
In the event the couple did not vacate, the settlement agreement provided that McCown would be entitled to a writ of restitution and immediate set out, the agreement provided.
The Neiberts on Feb. 5, 2024, filed a motion for relief from judgment, motion to stay execution and request for hearing summary continued.
The couple claimed that “justice requires (they) be given an opportunity to present the new evidence in this case.”
The municipal court on Feb. 16, 2024, denied the motion having found the voluntary settlement agreement was a binding contract and that no judgment had yet been entered in the case. In addition, the trial court noted that the Neiberts had not demonstrated that they had a meritorious defense.
The Neiberts then appealed to the Tenth District court.
“Generally, a decision denying a Civ.R. 60(B) motion for relief from judgment is a final, appealable order,” Boggs continued. “However, a Civ.R. 60(B) motion is proper only with respect to final judgments. In other words, the order to which the Civ.R. 60(B) is directed must itself be a final, appealable order, and if it is not, then the judgment denying the Civ.R. 60(B) motion is not final.”
She noted that the settlement agreement executed by the Neiberts was provisional and that it contemplated further action––the Neiberts would vacate the property and McCown would dismiss the action.
“However, if the Neiberts did not vacate the property, then McCown would be entitled to a writ of restitution and immediate set out,” the judge wrote. “The trial court’s adoption of the settlement agreement was therefore not a final appealable order from which Civ.R. 60(B) could afford relief. The trial court correctly found that, because no final judgment had been granted in this case, the Neiberts’ motion for relief from judgment was not ripe.”
Tenth District judges Laurel Beatty Blunt and Michael Mentel concurred with Boggs’ decision.
Copyright © 2025 The Daily Reporter - All Rights Reserved