PNC Bank, N.A. v. Craig
2012 Ohio 5410
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Appellee PNC Bank, N.A. brought foreclosure against pro se appellant Carol J. Craig on a promissory note of $116,608 secured by mortgage (National City Mortgage Company successor by merger).
- Note and mortgage executed April 26, 2004; mortgage secured the obligation.
- PNC filed foreclosure complaint on September 26, 2011 alleging default exceeding 90 days and acceleration of the note.
- PNC elected to declare the entire principal due: $109,675.08 as of September 29, 2011.
- Appellant did not respond to PNC’s December 2011 motion for summary judgment; trial court granted SJ on January 12, 2012.
- Craig appealed pro se challenging the SJ ruling; the court reviews SJ de novo and requires pro se parties to adhere to appellate rules.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether summary judgment foreclosure was proper | PNC: no genuine issues; moving party showed entitlement | Craig: insufficient response, but assertions lack proper assignments of error | Yes, SJ affirmed; no genuine issues established |
Key Cases Cited
- Brown v. Scioto Cty. Bd. of Commrs., 87 Ohio App.3d 704 (4th Dist.1993) (de novo review standard for SJ appeals)
- Brewer v. Cleveland Bd. of Edn., 122 Ohio App.3d 378 (8th Dist.1997) (applies Civ.R.56 standards; burden on nonmoving party)
- Dupler v. Mansfield Journal Co., 64 Ohio St.2d 116 (1980) (establishes summary judgment standard)
- State ex rel. Fulton v. Halliday, 142 Ohio St. 548 (1944) (pro se litigants bound by same rules as counsel)