SRMOF 2009-1 Trust v. Lewis

8 N.E.3d 962, 138 Ohio St. 3d 1492
CourtOhio Supreme Court
DecidedMay 14, 2014
Docket2014-0485
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 8 N.E.3d 962 (SRMOF 2009-1 Trust v. Lewis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
SRMOF 2009-1 Trust v. Lewis, 8 N.E.3d 962, 138 Ohio St. 3d 1492 (Ohio 2014).

Opinion

Butler App. Nos. CA2012-11-239 and CA2013-05-068, 2014-Ohio-71. On review of order certifying a conflict, the court determines that a conflict exists on both issues certified. The parties are to brief issue 1 stated on pages 2-3 of the court of appeals’ entry filed March 12, 2014:

“In order to establish standing in a foreclosure action and invoke the jurisdiction of the common pleas court, must the plaintiff establish at the time complaint for foreclosure is filed that it has an interest in both the note and the mortgage, or is it sufficient if the Plaintiff demonstrates an interest in either the note or the mortgage?”

The conflict case is BAC Home Loans Servicing v. McFerren, 9th Dist. Summit No. 26384, 2013-Ohio-3228.

O’Donnell, J., dissents.

Issue 2 is held for the decision in 2012-2110, CitiMortgage, Inc. v. Roznowski, 5th Dist. Stark No. 2012-CA-93, 2012-Ohio-4901; and briefing schedule stayed.

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

Related

U.S. Bank Natl. Assn. v. George
2015 Ohio 4957 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2015)
The Bank of New York Mellon v. Lewis
2014 Ohio 5599 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2014)
Bank of America v. Jones
2014 Ohio 4985 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
8 N.E.3d 962, 138 Ohio St. 3d 1492, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/srmof-2009-1-trust-v-lewis-ohio-2014.