Shikner v. S P Solutions, Unpublished Decision (1-13-2006)

{¶ 30} I respectfully dissent.

{¶ 31} The majority holds that the court erred and denied Shikner his due process rights by granting "default judgment" because the notice requirements of Civ.R. 55 were not satisfied, and S P failed to make a written motion for default judgment, as required by Local Rule VI(A). I disagree.

{¶ 32} Contrary to the majority's conclusion, Shikner did not raise these issues in the trial court. Ordinarily, "an appellate court will not consider any error which [the complaining party] could have called * * * to the trial court's attention at a time when such error could…