Mason, OH
Real estate Lawyer at Mason, OH
Practice Areas: Real Estate, Foreclosure, Business
OUTCOME: Foreclosure was determined to be proper.
Homeowner had no interest in and was not prejudiced by the lack of proper notice to others when a certified copy of a foreclosure complaint was not filed in both of the counties where his property was ... located because he was not a party whose protection was contemplated by the doctrine of lis pendens, under R.C. 2703.26.
OUTCOME: My clients prevailed on summary judgment.
Summary judgment was properly granted to realtors and their companies in a property owner's action, alleging that they were negligent in not preventing a third party from entering her property and sett ... ing fire to it, as the fire was not reasonably foreseeable, proximate cause was not shown, and the arsonist's actions were an intervening act.
OUTCOME: Matter not yet concluded.
Mortgagee's evidence showed that it was real party in interest under Civ. R. 17(A) in foreclosure suit as its evidence, in form of affidavits and documents, including an assignment and an allonge to no ... te indicating that note was payable to mortgagee, showed that it was owner of mortgagor's note and mortgage at time foreclosure action was commenced.
OUTCOME: Client's lien was determined to be first and best lien.
A mechanic's lien had priority over a later mortgage because (1) the lien was recorded before the mortgage, and (2) the mortgage had no priority under R.C. 1311.14 because language letting the mortgage ... e protect a security interest did not meet statutory mandates that the mortgagee be allowed to do all things provided to be done under the statute.
Ad
Transform legal challenges into solutions.
Connect now to review your situation.
