Davet v. Sheehan
2014 Ohio 5694
Ohio Ct. App.2014Background
- Richard Davet owned property at 793 E. 152nd St., Cleveland; tax lien certificates on the property were negotiated to GLS Capital between 1999–2002.
- GLS Capital filed a foreclosure in 2002 but later dismissed that action; the Cuyahoga County Treasurer filed a separate tax foreclosure on May 5, 2006.
- The 2006 foreclosure resulted in a decree (Nov. 27, 2007); after unsuccessful sheriff’s sales the property forfeited to the state and was sold at a forfeited-land sale in August 2008 to Collinwood & Nottingham Villages Development Corp.
- Davet later sued (Quiet Title Action, 2010) claiming the Treasurer lacked standing in 2006 because GLS still owned the certificates, so the foreclosure was void ab initio; he also asserted a trespass claim against a demolition contractor.
- Trial court granted summary judgment for appellees; this court remanded to decide whether the Treasurer actually held (or had reacquired) the tax certificates before May 5, 2006.
- On remand the Treasurer produced evidence (auditor records and stamped certificates) showing GLS’s certificates had been voided and reacquired by the Treasurer in May 2005 and January 2006; the trial court again granted summary judgment for appellees and this appeal followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Treasurer had standing to bring the May 5, 2006 foreclosure | Davet: GLS still owned the tax certificates when the County filed, so Treasurer lacked standing | Appellees: Auditor records and voided, time‑stamped certificates show the Treasurer reacquired the certificates before May 5, 2006 | Court: Treasurer had valid possession of the certificates and thus standing; summary judgment for appellees upheld |
| Whether Quiet Title Action was a permitted collateral attack on foreclosure judgment | Davet: Foreclosure was void ab initio for lack of standing; thus collateral attack is allowed | Appellees: Under Ohio law, failure to raise standing in the underlying foreclosure or on direct appeal bars collateral attack (res judicata) | Court: Collateral attack barred by res judicata per Ohio Supreme Court precedent; plaintiff should have raised standing earlier |
| Whether Davet retained any possessory or reversionary interest after foreclosure & deed to purchaser | Davet: Claims superior title despite foreclosure sale and auditor’s deed | Appellees: Foreclosure and auditor’s deed extinguished Davet’s interest; Davet lacks possession required to maintain quiet-title or trespass claims | Court: Davet has no possessory interest or remainder/reversionary interest; claims fail |
| Whether trespass claim against demolition contractor survives | Davet: Contractor’s entry/demolition would be unlawful because his title survives | Appellees: No trespass because Davet lacked actual or constructive possession | Court: Trespass claim fails—no possession, so no basis for trespass relief |
Key Cases Cited
- Fed. Home Loan Mtge. Corp. v. Schwartzwald, 134 Ohio St.3d 13 (Ohio 2012) (standing required at commencement of foreclosure; lack of standing requires dismissal)
- Robinson v. Williams, 62 Ohio St. (Ohio 1900) (actions in foreclosure fall within common-pleas court subject-matter jurisdiction)