Ohio. Civ.R. 50
Staff Note (July 1, 2018 Amendment)
Division (B): Post-trial motion for judgment or for judgment in lieu of verdict.
The amendment provides that if the clerk fails to serve the parties with notice of a judgment in the three-day period contemplated by Civ.R. 58(B), the time to serve a post-trial motion for judgment in favor of the movant does not begin to run until after the clerk does so. The purpose of the amendment is to avoid the harsh result that otherwise can occur if a would-be movant does not receive notice of the judgment. See, e.g., Wing v. Haaff, 1st Dist. Hamilton No. C-160257, 2016- Ohio-8258. This amendment brings the timing of post-trial motions under Civ.R. 50 in line with the timing of a notice of appeal in civil cases under App.R. 4(A)(3).
Staff Note (July 1, 2015 Amendments)
Consistent with the provisions of Civ.R. 59(B) addressing motions for new trial, Civ.R. 50(B) is amended to make clear that the motion must be served within the required time. The time for filing the motion is governed by Civ.R. 5(D).
Consistent with a similar amendment to Civ.R. 6(B), the provisions of Civ.R. 50(B) are also amended to specify, in the absence of a local rule or court order providing a time for responding to a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, a fallback time of fourteen days after service of the motion within which to serve responsive arguments. In the absence of a local rule or court order addressing replies, the amendment also permits the movant to serve reply arguments within seven days after service of the adverse party’s response. The time for filing responsive arguments and replies is governed by Civ.R. 5(D), again in the absence of a local rule or order of the court specifying a different time for filing.
Staff Notes (July 1, 2013 Amendments)
Rule 50(B) is amended to extend the time for filing a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict to 28 days after entry of judgment, or within 28 days after the jury has been discharged if a verdict was not returned. These changes are modeled on the 2009 amendments to Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(b) and are made for the same reasons that prompted the amendments to the federal rule.