Bank of Am., N.A. v. Farris, 2015 Ohio 4980

In December 2005 Louis and Corrine Farris borrowed $1,495,000 from Washington Mutual (WaMu), executing a promissory note (indorsed in blank) secured by a mortgage on their Kingscote Park property. JP Morgan Chase (Chase) serviced the loan.
WaMu failed in 2008; the FDIC sold assets to Chase. The Farrises defaulted on the loan in March 2011.
Chase executed and recorded an assignment of the mortgage to Bank of America (BOA) on March 29, 2012. Chase continued as servicer; BOA filed a foreclosure complaint on May 25, 2012.
BOA supported summary-judgment motion with affidavits from Chase officers stating Chase (as servicer) had possession of the original note and mortgage and that the mortgage was assigned to BOA; counsel also had physical possession for litigation.
The Farrises argued BOA lacked standing, that Chase never owned/transferred the note, that possession/indorsement issues precluded BOA from enforcing the note, and challenged chain-of-title.
The trial court granted BOA summary judgment; the court of appeals affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether conflicting affidavits create a factual dispute about BOA's status as note holder	BOA (through Chase affidavits) showed constructive/actual possession of the original note and mortgage	Farrises said Chase’s affidavits were internally inconsistent about what Chase acquired from the FDIC, creating a factual dispute	No: because the note was indorsed in blank, possession (actual or constructive) established BOA’s ability to enforce; affidavits did not create a genuine issue
Whether BOA had standing to foreclose	BOA was the holder or a party entitled to enforce the note: Chase (servicer) had possession and mortgage assignment to BOA was recorded before suit	Farrises contended BOA lacked actual possession of the note and thus lacked standing	BOA had standing: indorsement-in-blank + servicer’s possession gives constructive possession; mortgage assignment also transferred the note and afforded standing
Whether BOA had to prove an unbroken chain of title as a non-original mortgagee	BOA need not trace every prior transfer when it holds a note indorsed in blank; assignment of the mortgage was recorded pre-suit	Farrises argued BOA failed to prove chain of title and that assignment validity was defective because transfer from WaMu to Chase wasn’t documented	No genuine issue: with an indorsed-in-blank note chain-of-title defenses are immaterial; Farrises lack standing to contest inter-party assignments

Smiddy v. The Wedding Party, Inc., 30 Ohio St.3d 35 (Ohio 1987) (standard for de novo review of summary judgment).
State ex rel. Dallman v. Franklin Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 35 Ohio St.2d 176 (Ohio 1973) (standing requires a real interest in the subject matter).
Fed. Home Loan Mtge. Corp. v. Schwartzwald, 134 Ohio St.3d 13 (Ohio 2012) (a party has standing to foreclose when it is the holder of the note or has been assigned the mortgage).