Since Bank was the Note-Holder it was a Person Entitled to Enforce the Note Pursuant to R.C. 1303.31(A)(1)

Posted by & filed under 2013, Downstream litigation, Downstream litigation by date, Downstream litigation by state, Downstream litigation commentary, Note ownership litigation, Ohio.

The court in deciding Bank of Am., N.A. v. Pasqualone, 2013-Ohio-5795 (Ohio Ct. App., Franklin County, 2013) affirmed the decision of the lower court. The court found that the promissory note was a negotiable instrument subject to relevant provisions of R.C. Chapter 1303 because it contained a promise to pay the lender the amount of… Read more »

Court Finds that Bank was Entitled to Enforce the Instrument Under R.C. 1303.31

Posted by & filed under 2013, Downstream litigation, Downstream litigation by date, Downstream litigation by state, Foreclosures, MBS industry, MERS/Bank has standing, MERS/Bank lacks standing, Note ownership litigation, Ohio.

The court in deciding M & T Bank v. Strawn, 2013-Ohio-5845 (Ohio Ct. App., Trumbull County 2013) affirmed the lower court’s decision and found that appellant’s argument was without merit. Appellant framed three issues for this court’s review. First, appellant contended that the trial court erred in relying upon the affidavit of Mr. Fisher to… Read more »

Ohio Court of Appeals Finds that BAC had Failed to Demonstrate that it had Standing to Accelerate the Note and Foreclose the Mortgage

Posted by & filed under 2013, Downstream litigation, Downstream litigation by date, Downstream litigation by state, Downstream litigation media coverage, MERS/Bank has standing, MERS/Bank lacks standing, Note ownership litigation, Ohio.

The court in deciding BAC Home Loans Servicing, L.P. v. Blythe, 2013-Ohio-5775 (Ohio Ct. App., Columbiana County, 2013) reversed the lower court’s judgment. Appellant Walter J. Blythe appealed the lower court’s decision granting summary judgment in favor of Appellee, BAC Home Loans Servicing, L.P., in this foreclosure action. Blythe challenged the lower court’s finding that… Read more »

Ohio Court Held That the Promissory Note was a Negotiable Instrument Subject to Relevant Provisions of R.C. Chapter 1303

Posted by & filed under 2013, Downstream litigation, Downstream litigation by date, Downstream litigation by state, Equity, Foreclosures, MBS industry, Note ownership litigation, Ohio.

The court in deciding Bank of Am., N.A. v. Pasqualone, 2013-Ohio-5795 (Ohio Ct. App., Franklin County, 2013) ultimately decided that the motion to strike moot, thus this court affirmed judgment of the lower court. This court held that the promissory note was a negotiable instrument subject to relevant provisions of R.C. Chapter 1303 because it… Read more »

Ohio Court Reverses Summary Judgment in Favor of HSBC Bank

Posted by & filed under 2013, Downstream litigation, Downstream litigation by date, Downstream litigation by state, Downstream litigation commentary, Equity, MBS industry, Ohio.

The court in deciding HSBC Bank USA v. Teagarden, 2013-Ohio-5816 (Ohio Ct. App., Trumbull County, 2013) reversed the ruling for summary judgment in favor of HSBC Bank. Defendants-appellants, [Teagardens], appealed two judgment entries from the lower court, dismissing the Teagardens’ counterclaims and granting summary judgment in favor of plaintiff-appellee, HSBC Bank USA, National Trust Company…. Read more »

Ohio Court Decides Bank’s Possession of Note was Properly Shown

Posted by & filed under 2013, Downstream litigation, Downstream litigation by date, Downstream litigation by state, Equity, Foreclosures, MERS/Bank lacks standing, Note ownership litigation, Ohio.

The court in deciding M & T Bank v. Strawn, 2013-Ohio-5845 (Ohio Ct. App., Trumbull County, 2013) ultimately affirmed the lower court’s decision. The court decided that the bank’s possession of the note was shown by the affidavit, along with attached copies of the note endorsed to the bank, and the court found that one… Read more »

Ohio Court Decided There Was no Basis to Challenge Standing Through a Civ.R. 60(B) Motion

Posted by & filed under 2013, Downstream litigation, Downstream litigation by state, Downstream litigation commentary, Equity, Foreclosures, MBS industry, MERS/Bank lacks standing, Note ownership litigation, Ohio.

The court in deciding Deutsche Bank Nat’l Trust Co. v. Santisi, 2013-Ohio-5848 (Ohio Ct. App., Trumbull County, 2013) ultimately denied the motion to vacate and affirmed the lower court’s decision. Santisi appealed the lower court’s decision and raised the following assignments of error: 1) plaintiff (appellee) failed to present an affidavit or any other record… Read more »