Bank of New York Mellon v. Clancy
2014 Ohio 1975
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Mellon filed a foreclosure complaint in 2011 against the Clancys, Countryside Mortgage Ventures, and the County Treasurer, attaching a promissory note and a mortgage.
- The note was dated July 20, 2005, for $173,600, payable to the Lender, with the mortgage naming MERS as the mortgagee and referencing the same note.
- An assignment of the mortgage from MERS to Mellon was executed on May 12, 2011, granting Mellon all beneficial interest in the mortgage and note.
- The CWABS 2005-9 trust prospectus and supplement described the Trust structure, including the role of MERS and requirements for mortgage files and assignments.
- Clancy moved to vacate a 2011 foreclosure judgment, arguing mis-transfer of the mortgage and lack of Mellon standing; the trial court denied the motion.
- The sale of the property occurred in 2013, with the court later confirming the sheriff’s sale and canceling the mortgage.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Mellon had standing to foreclose | Mellon had a properly assigned mortgage and note at filing. | Mellon lacked standing due to improper transfer under the trust terms. | Mellon had standing; trial court affirmed. |
| Whether Clancy could challenge the mortgage assignment’s validity | Assignee/mortgage transfer valid, preserves plaintiff's standing. | Trust terms void the assignment or require earlier transfer. | Clancy lacked standing to attack the assignment. |
| Whether the trust documents required a timely assignment to Mellon | Documents show Mellon obtained interest; cross-referencing supports standing. | Closing date/timeframe and form of transfer violated trust terms. | No reversible defect; standing established by timing and cross-reference. |
| Whether Clancy had evidence to show Mellon’s lack of standing | Prospectus/Supplement evidence sufficed to prove Mellon’s role. | Supplements failed to prove Mellon lacked standing. | Clancy failed to provide evidence of Mellon’s lack of standing. |
Key Cases Cited
- Fed. Home Loan Mortg. Corp. v. Koch, 11th Dist. Geauga No. 2012-G-3084, 2013-Ohio-4423 (Ohio 2013) (standing requires interest in note or mortgage at filing)
- Schwartzwald, 134 Ohio St.3d 13, 2012-Ohio-5017 (Ohio 2012) (core standing requirement; injury/standing at commencement)
- Kapitula, 12th Dist. Clermont No. CA2012-08-058, 2013-Ohio-2638 (Ohio 2013) (standing when filed must show injury and remedy)
- Sherman, 2013-Ohio-4220 (Ohio 2013) (cross-reference between note and mortgage can establish interest)
- Unger, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 97315, 2012-Ohio-1950 (Ohio 2012) (debtors lack standing to challenge assignment)