U.S. Bank Natl. Assn. v. Lavelle
2016 Ohio 7783
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2016Background
- 2006: Daniel Lavelle executed a $199,500 promissory note and mortgage; note indorsed to LaSalle Bank as trustee for an Ownit loan trust.
- Daniel defaulted; LaSalle filed a foreclosure, then entered a loan modification with Daniel increasing principal and lowering interest; LaSalle voluntarily dismissed the first foreclosure without prejudice.
- LaSalle later filed a second foreclosure alleging default under the modified loan; that complaint was voluntarily dismissed without prejudice.
- U.S. Bank acquired the note and filed a third foreclosure in 2013 alleging default under the modified terms.
- Mary Lavelle moved for summary judgment arguing the Civ.R. 41(A)(1) "double dismissal" rule barred the third suit; trial court granted U.S. Bank summary judgment after procedural remand; appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the double-dismissal rule (Civ.R. 41(A)(1)) bars the third foreclosure action | U.S. Bank: the third suit alleges default on the modified loan (a new claim), so the double-dismissal rule does not apply | Mary: the prior two voluntary dismissals bar a subsequent prosecution of the same mortgage claim | Held: The modification created a new claim; because the second dismissal was the first dismissal of the new claim, the third suit was not barred by Civ.R. 41(A)(1) |
| Whether there were genuine issues of material fact precluding summary judgment | U.S. Bank: it produced the original note and explained inconsistencies; no factual dispute on holder status or default | Mary: procedural history and prior inconsistent documents raise factual questions | Held: On remand U.S. Bank resolved the inconsistency and demonstrated entitlement to summary judgment; no genuine issue of material fact remained |
Key Cases Cited
- Grafton v. Ohio Edison Co., 77 Ohio St.3d 102 (Ohio 1996) (de novo standard for reviewing summary judgment)
- Dresher v. Burt, 75 Ohio St.3d 280 (Ohio 1996) (burden-shifting framework for summary judgment motions)
- Zivich v. Mentor Soccer Club, 82 Ohio St.3d 367 (Ohio 1998) (summary judgment standard when construing evidence in favor of nonmoving party)
- U.S. Bank Natl. Assn. v. Gullotta, 120 Ohio St.3d 399 (Ohio 2008) (Civ.R. 41(A) does not bar a third claim that is different from previously dismissed claims)