Bank of Am., N.A. v. Kuchta

986 N.E.2d 1020, 135 Ohio St. 3d 1430
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided May 8, 2013·No. 2013-0304·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Medina App. No. 12CA0025-M, 2012-Ohio-5562. On review of order certifying a conflict. The court determines that a conflict exists. The parties are to brief the issue stated at page 1 of the court of appeals’ entry filed January 22, 2013:

“When a defendant fails to appeal from a trial court’s judgment in a foreclosure action, can a lack of standing be raised as part of a motion for relief from judgment?”

Pfeifer, O’Donnell, and French, JJ., dissent.

The conflict case is PNC Bank, N.A. v. Botts, 10th Dist. No. 12AP-256, 2012-Ohio-5383.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bank of Am., N.A. v. Kuchta, 986 N.E.2d 1020, 135 Ohio St. 3d 1430 (Ohio 2013).

986 N.E.2d 1020 (Bank of Am., N.A. v. Kuchta) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

LaSalle Bank Natl. Assn. v. Brown
2014 Ohio 3261 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2014)
HSBC Bank USA, Natl. Assn. v. Bailey
2014 Ohio 246 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2014)
Leondard v. Georgesville Ctr., L.L.C.
2013 Ohio 5390 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2013)
Wells Fargo Bank NA v. Arlington
2013 Ohio 4659 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2013)
Chemical Bank, N.A. v. Krawczyk
2013 Ohio 3614 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2013)