2019 Ohio 5212
Ohio Ct. App.2019Background
- Walter Broadnax executed a promissory note in April 2004 secured by a mortgage; he defaulted by missing the March 2007 payment.
- LaSalle Bank (later U.S. Bank by merger) sent a default notice and filed a foreclosure complaint on June 13, 2007; that action was later dismissed without prejudice after two years pursuant to a stipulation.
- LaSalle filed a second foreclosure action in June 2012 based on the same default; that action was dismissed without prejudice in May 2013.
- U.S. Bank filed a third foreclosure complaint in November 2013; Broadnax raised a statute-of-limitations defense and moved for summary judgment.
- The trial court (adopting the magistrate) granted summary judgment for U.S. Bank; on appeal the bank conceded the 2007 filing accelerated the debt but argued for the first time that the saving statute saved its claim—an argument not presented below and thus waived.
- The appellate court held the June 13, 2007 acceleration started the six-year limitations period under R.C. 1303.16(A), which expired in June 2013, rendering the November 2013 complaint time-barred; the court reversed and remanded with instructions to enter judgment for Broadnax.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the June 2007 foreclosure filing accelerated the entire debt and triggered the six‑year limitations period under R.C. 1303.16(A) | The bank argued the effective acceleration date was November 2013 (so claim timely); alternatively on appeal argued the saving statute preserved the claim | Broadnax argued the June 13, 2007 filing accelerated the loan and the six‑year limitations period expired in June 2013, so the Nov. 2013 suit is time‑barred | Court held the bank conceded June 13, 2007 accelerated the debt; statute expired June 2013; Nov. 2013 complaint barred. Bank’s saving‑statute argument was waived. |
Key Cases Cited
- First Fin. Bank, N.A. v. Mendenhall, 84 N.E.3d 1113 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017) (summary‑judgment standard and de novo review)
- Bank of New York Mellon v. Walker, 78 N.E.3d 930 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017) (acceleration date triggers R.C. 1303.16 limitations clock)
- Bank of New York Mellon v. DePizzo, 42 N.E.3d 1218 (Ohio Ct. App. 2015) (acceleration requires affirmative lender action beyond mere default)
- Frysinger v. Leech, 512 N.E.2d 337 (Ohio 1987) (Ohio saving‑statute principles and relation‑back doctrine)
- Dept. of Natural Resources v. Ebbing, 28 N.E.3d 682 (Ohio Ct. App. 2015) (issue‑abandonment on appeal treated as waived)