Bank of New York Mellon Trust Co. Natl. v. Mihalca, 2012 Ohio 567

Foreclosure action by Bank of New York Mellon Trust Co. against Corneliu and Liana Mihalca on a mortgage/note; photocopy of note payable to Bank with allonges; Mihalcas demanded inspection of the original note but Bank did not produce it before summary judgment briefing; Bank relied on an affidavit from Joyce Nelson claiming current possession/holder status; trial court granted Bank's summary judgment and entered a decree of foreclosure on December 21, 2010; Bank did not circulate the proposed judgment entry to Mihalcas before submission; Mihalcas appealed asserting lack of possession and a local-rule notice violation.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was there a genuine issue of material fact on possession of the note to establish holder status?	Mihalcas argued Bank failed to prove current possession of the original note.	Bank maintained it possessed the note as holder and payee via Nelson's affidavit.	Yes, genuine issue existed; summary judgment improper.
Did the trial court commit error by not circulating the proposed judgment entry under Local Rule 7.17(B)?	Mihalcas argued the rule required prior circulation before submission.	Bank argued the rule was satisfied by proper conduct.	moot because first issue resolved in Mihalcas’ favor; but rule compliance analyzed.

Dresher v. Burt, 75 Ohio St.3d 280 (1996) (reciprocal Dresher burden for summary judgment)
Grafton v. Ohio Edison Co., 77 Ohio St.3d 102 (1996) (summary judgment standards and burden shifting)
Temple v. Wean United, Inc., 50 Ohio St.2d 317 (1977) (summary judgment considerations)
Viock v. Stow-Woodward Co., 13 Ohio App.3d 7 (1983) (nonmoving party benefit on summary judgment)
U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Richards, 189 Ohio App.3d 276 (2010) (real party in interest and possession issues in foreclosure)
Dennis/ Dennison v. Dennison, 165 Ohio St.146 (1956) (mandatory interpretation of 'shall' in rules)