father attempts to appeal from the order granting mother rule 60(b) relief in this separate abuse and neglect proceeding (circuit court file 01-025). Neither the order, the memorandum opinion, nor the findings of fact and conclusions of law entered on that motion appear in this file or are a part of the record made by father. However, they are included in the appendix to the State’s brief. Procedurally, it appears father has failed to perfect his appeal from that order and present it to this Court for review. At any rate, we reach the merits of this argument. B. Merits of Argument [¶ 7.] SDCL 15-6-60(b) permits a court, among other things, to relieve a party from a final judgment within a reasonable time for any reason justifying relief. Matter of J.M.J., 368 N.W.2d 602, 607 (S.D.1985) (<HOLDING>). “Rule 60(b) is an extraordinary remedy which
holding that trial courts failure to appoint parent an attorney ad litem in termination proceeding was reversible error holding the denial of a bill of particulars was not reversible error because it failed to cause the defendant any prejudice holding that if these preservation requirements are met any error in the denial of a challenge for cause is reversible error holding denial of a petition to vacate a termination order was reversible error holding the denial of a proper question is always reversible error