Bank of Am. v. Macho
2011 Ohio 5495
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Macho refinanced her home with WaMu (Oak originated) in Oct 2006, signing a note and mortgage; alleged misrepresentations in loan application and conflicting disclosures from WaMu, Oak, Anthem Escrow; Macho obtained a second WaMu loan of $15,000.
- WaMu was taken over by the FDIC in Sept 2008; Chase purchased WaMu’s assets.
- Bank of America, as assignee of the primary note, filed foreclosure against Macho on June 17, 2009; WaMu was named as a party due to the $15,000 loan.
- In July 2010, the FDIC moved to substitute for WaMu and to dismiss claims against it, arguing FIRREA deprived the state court of jurisdiction.
- The trial court dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction; Macho appealed, challenging the FIRREA-based ruling and related notices.
- The appellate court held that FIRREA claims process governs, giving exclusive jurisdiction and requiring exhaustion of administrative remedies before judicial review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court had subject matter jurisdiction under FIRREA | Macho argues the court could hear the claims against WaMu/FDIC | FDIC argues FIRREA strips state court of jurisdiction over such claims | Subject matter jurisdiction denied; FIRREA mandatory claims process governs |
| Whether valid notice under FIRREA was provided | Macho claims lack of notice to FDIC | FDIC asserts notice via publication and mailed administrative notice was proper | Notice proper; publication plus mailed notice satisfied FIRREA requirements |
| Whether FIRREA and the FDIC are constitutional | Constitutionality of FIRREA and FDIC | FIRREA constitutional under Commerce/Necessary and Proper Clauses | Constitutionality upheld; FIRREA valid |
| Whether removal was required or proper | FDIC should have removed the case to federal court | Removal unnecessary; exhaustion required before review | Removal not required; exhaustion of administrative remedies governs |
Key Cases Cited
- Village of Oakwood v. State Bank & Trust Co., 539 F.3d 373 (6th Cir. 2008) (exhaustion and review limitations under FIRREA; jurisdictional framework)
- Rosa v. Resolution Trust Corp., 938 F.2d 383 (3d Cir. 1991) (federal exhaustion and administrative remedies under FIRREA)
- F.D.I.C. v. Updike Bros., Inc., 814 F.Supp.1035 (D. Wyo. 1993) (exhaustion rules under FIRREA; judicial review limitations)