Mun. Tax Invest., L.L.C v. Pate
2016 Ohio 7791
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Municipal Tax Investment, LLC (plaintiff) sued to foreclose tax-certificates on property owned by Patricia Tripodi-Wademi (appellant) and her sister; suit filed Jan 2014 in Franklin C.P.
- Initial certified-mail service at the property address was signed for by appellant's mother; later certified mail to appellant's North Carolina address was returned "unclaimed."
- Clerk then mailed the summons/complaint to appellant in North Carolina by ordinary mail; that envelope was not returned undeliverable.
- After unsuccessful mediation, plaintiff obtained summary judgment and a decree of foreclosure in Feb 2015; appellant moved under Civ.R. 60(B) in Jan 2016 to vacate, claiming defective service, lack of personal jurisdiction, excusable neglect, and defects in plaintiff's tax-certificate title.
- Trial court denied the Civ.R. 60(B) motion; appellant appealed. The appellate court affirms.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was service of process sufficient to confer personal jurisdiction? | Service was proper because ordinary mail to out-of-state defendant is effective when certified mail is returned unclaimed and ordinary mail is not returned. | Service was defective because appellant did not sign for certified mail and did not live at the initial address. | Held: Service was proper under Civ.R. 4.1/4.3/4.6 (certified returned unclaimed → ordinary mail completes service if not returned). |
| Did appellant waive any service defect by participating in mediation? | Plaintiff argued later actions (mediation request, filings) constituted appearance/waiver of service defects. | Appellant argued she never waived defects and lacked jurisdiction. | Held: Court found service sufficient; waiver issue rendered moot. |
| Did appellant show a meritorious defense (required for Civ.R. 60(B)) based on plaintiff's alleged failure to register as a foreign LLC when buying tax certificates? | Plaintiff maintained its title and standing were valid when it filed suit and when judgment entered. | Appellant argued two tax certificates were illegally obtained because plaintiff was not yet registered as a foreign LLC when purchased. | Held: Not meritorious — failure to register does not invalidate acts or preclude defending or enforcing rights once registered; plaintiff was registered when suit filed. |
| Was relief warranted under Civ.R. 60(B) (meritorious defense, excusable neglect, timeliness)? | Plaintiff opposed relief, arguing appellant failed GTE factors. | Appellant asserted excusable neglect (health issues, service problems) and alleged meritorious defenses. | Held: Denial affirmed — appellant failed the meritorious-defense prong; court did not abuse discretion. |
Key Cases Cited
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (Ohio 1983) (standard for abuse of discretion)
- Kentucky Oaks Mall Co. v. Mitchell's Formal Wear, Inc., 53 Ohio St.3d 73 (Ohio 1990) (out-of-state service rules and personal jurisdiction)
- J. R. Prods., Inc. v. Young, 3 Ohio App.3d 407 (Ohio Ct. App. 1982) (certified returned unclaimed allows ordinary-mail service)
- GTE Automatic Electric, Inc. v. ARC Industries, Inc., 47 Ohio St.2d 146 (Ohio 1976) (three-prong test for Civ.R. 60(B))
- Strack v. Pelton, 70 Ohio St.3d 172 (Ohio 1994) (failure to satisfy any GTE prong bars relief)
- Harris v. Anderson, 109 Ohio St.3d 101 (Ohio 2006) (standard of review for Civ.R. 60(B) denial)