From our private database of 33,800+ case briefs...
Coulson v. Coulson
Ohio Supreme Court
448 N.E.2d 809 (1983)
In 1975, Robert A. Coulson (defendant) and Joan Coulson (plaintiff) decided to divorce after 12 years of marriage because of Robert’s extramarital affair. Upon Robert’s request, Leonard Saltzer, who was Robert’s corporate attorney, agreed to handle the divorce process and draft a separation agreement. Robert and Joan met briefly with Saltzer to sign the agreement. Saltzer then filed a divorce petition on Joan’s behalf, in which he represented himself as Joan’s attorney. In January 1976, the court held a hearing on the divorce decree, at which Saltzer continued to represent himself as Joan’s attorney and misled the court to believe that Joan had initiated the divorce. The trial judge asked Joan whether she believed that the settlement was fair. Although Joan was unsure, Saltzer assured the judge that it was fair. In February 1976, the judge ordered the divorce decree with the separation agreement incorporated into it. Over two years later, Joan filed a motion under Civ. R. 60(B)(5) for a relief from the judgment on the ground that Saltzer’s conduct, as an officer of the court, constituted fraud upon the court because he misrepresented that he was Joan’s attorney and because he misrepresented that the settlement was fair. After a hearing, the trial court granted Joan’s motion. Robert appealed on the ground that Joan should have filed a motion for relief under Civ. R. 60(B)(3), which required the motion be made within one year of the judgment, and that the doctrine of res judicata barred the motion because Joan had filed two earlier motions. The court of appeals rejected Robert’s arguments and affirmed the trial court. The matter was appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Sweeney, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 606,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 606,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,800 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.