From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Scheetz v. Scheetz

Court of Appeals of Indiana, Second District
May 12, 1988
522 N.E.2d 919 (Ind. Ct. App. 1988)

Opinion

No. 2-785-A-229.

May 12, 1988.

Appeal from the Superior Court, Hamilton County, Ronald E. Drury, Special Judge.

Michael A. Bergin, Locke, Reynolds, Boyd Weisell, Indianapolis, for appellant.

William T. Rosenbaum, Indianapolis, Chris L. Shelby, Lebanon, for appellee.


ON REHEARING


In our opinion in this case, Scheetz v. Scheetz (1987), Ind. App., 509 N.E.2d 840, we affirmed the trial court's judgment in all respects, except we reversed as to granting Sandra (wife) relief under Indiana Rules of Procedure, Trial Rule 60.

Apparently, the parties interpret our opinion as permitting the trial court to reopen the case now for the presentation of additional evidence on the subject of valuation of the property of the parties. This is not so. A full evidentiary hearing was conducted in this dissolution proceeding. The parties are bound by the evidence they introduced at trial. See In Re Marriage of Church (1981), Ind. App., 424 N.E.2d 1078, trans. denied; see also Showley v. Showley (1983), Ind. App., 454 N.E.2d 1230. The trial court may not reopen the case for the purpose of allowing additional evidence to be presented by either party but may on remand make any adjustments it deems necessary from the evidence already before the court.

Rehearing denied.

NEAL and ROBERTSON, JJ., concur (sitting by designation).


Summaries of

Scheetz v. Scheetz

Court of Appeals of Indiana, Second District
May 12, 1988
522 N.E.2d 919 (Ind. Ct. App. 1988)
Case details for

Scheetz v. Scheetz

Case Details

Full title:JOHN MICHAEL SCHEETZ, APPELLANT (PETITIONER), v. SANDRA MARIE SCHEETZ…

Court:Court of Appeals of Indiana, Second District

Date published: May 12, 1988

Citations

522 N.E.2d 919 (Ind. Ct. App. 1988)

Citing Cases

Melton v. Melton

"The parties are bound by the evidence they introduced at trial." Scheetz v. Scheetz, 522 N.E.2d 919, 920…

Meade v. Levett

we also note that there is a split of authority concerning the power of the trial court to enter orders…