Tauwab v. Huntington Bank
2012 Ohio 923
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Tauwab and BAB & Associates sue Huntington Bank, Safeguard Properties, Premier, Lane, and Lozier for trespass and conversion relating to a property at 6075 Penfield Lane, Solon, Ohio.
- Huntington allegedly authorized Safeguard and its contractor Premier and employees to enter to secure the property after a defaulted loan.
- Tauwab defaulted on a January 2008 promissory note; Huntington, as mortgage holder, invoked the Mortgage Protection Provision to have the property secured.
- Safeguard conducted exterior inspections and Premier entered the home on June 17, 2010; Tauwab claimed personal-property theft totaling about $150,000.
- Huntington and Safeguard moved for summary judgment; the trial court granted summary judgment to all defendants on all counts.
- Appellate court affirms, adopting the trial court’s reasoning that Huntington’s entry was authorized and not a trespass, and that conversion claims against Huntington, Safeguard, and Premier fail.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Huntington’s entry constituted trespass | Tauwab contends entry was unauthorized | Huntington acted under the Mortgage Protection Provision | No trespass; entry authorized under contract |
| Whether Huntington is liable for conversion | Agency liability for conversion via Safeguard | No liability for principal for independent contractor | Huntington not liable; conversion claim fails |
| Whether Safeguard and Premier are liable for trespass or conversion | Safeguard/Premier liable for entering and seizing property | Authorized entry vicariously through Huntington | Safeguard and Premier granted summary judgment on trespass and conversion |
Key Cases Cited
- Kemelhar v. Kohn, 110 Ohio App. 248 (Oh. App. 1959) (general rule: principals not liable for independent contractors; no trespass exception)
- Hughes v. Cincinnati & S.R. Co., 39 Ohio St. 461 (1883) (trespass/liability framework for agency/employee actions)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (summary judgment standard; genuine issues of material fact)
- First National Bank of Arizona v. Cities Service Co., 391 U.S. 253 (1968) (summary judgment standard; inference not enough for triable issue)
- Mortgage Elec. Registration Sys., Inc. v. Tracie Mosley, 2010 Ohio 2886 (Ohio) (authority of MERS to assign mortgage/note)
- Countrywide Home Loans Servicing L.P. v. Shifflet, 2010 Ohio 1266 (Ohio) (recognizes assignment authority and mortgage protections)