Ohio Supreme Court To Address Standing in Foreclosure Cases

From Dick Davet:

About U.S. Bank  v. Duvall

The Ohio Supreme Court announced two separate decisions relating to Duvall on Wednesday, April 6, 2011.  In respect of the U.S. Bank notice of appeal and filing seeking a discretionary review, the Court dismissed the appeal in Case No. 2011-0171.  Interestingly, FOUR Supreme Court Justices dissented from the dismissal!

See:

http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/0/2011/2011-ohio-1618.pdf

http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/Clerk/ecms/resultsbycasenumber.asp?type=3&year=2011&number=0171&myPage=searchbycasenumber%2Easp
But also on Wednesday, the Supreme Court DID certify the conflict previously identified by the Court of Appeals on the U.S. Bank motion in Case No. 2011-0218:

http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/0/2011/2011-ohio-1618.pdf

http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/Clerk/ecms/resultsbycasenumber.asp?type=3&year=2011&number=0218&myPage=searchbycasenumber%2Easp
The net effect of these two decisions is that the Ohio Supreme Court is going to hear and determine this certified question in respect of the U.S. Bank v. Duvall decision:

“To have standing as a plaintiff in a mortgage foreclosure action, must a party show that it owned the note and the mortgage when the complaint was filed?”
See:  http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/tempx/187169.pdf

For More Information on Foreclosure Defense Contact:

Law Office of Marc Dann Co. LPA

216-373-0539

www.dannlaw.com

Tagged with: , , , ,
Posted in Forclosure, Predatory Lending, Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: