Wells Fargo v. Burrows
2012 Ohio 5995
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Burrows executed a $162,800 note and open-end mortgage on a Hudson, Ohio property on August 2, 2005.
- Wells Fargo filed a foreclosure action on December 29, 2009 seeking to enforce the note/mortgage.
- Burrows moved to dismiss in March 2010 arguing Wells Fargo lacked standing; court denied in April 2010.
- Wells Fargo moved for summary judgment December 20, 2011; Burrows cross-moved; trial court granted Wells Fargo in February 2012.
- On appeal, Burrows challenged standing; court held Wells Fargo failed to show standing as of commencement of suit.
- Court reversed, and remanded to dismiss the complaint without prejudice for lack of standing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Wells Fargo had standing to foreclose | Wells Fargo had standing as current holder by merger/assignment | Wells Fargo failed to prove it was the current holder; no recorded assignment | Lacks standing at commencement; dismissal of complaint required |
Key Cases Cited
- Fed. Home Loan Mtge. Corp. v. Schwartzwald, Slip Opinion No. 2012-Ohio-5017 (Ohio Supreme Court 2012) (standing must be established to invoke jurisdiction; lack requires dismissal)
- U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Richards, 189 Ohio App.3d 276 (9th Dist. 2010) (real party in interest is current holder of note and mortgage)
- CitiMortgage, Inc. v. Firestone, 2012-Ohio-2044 (9th Dist. 2012) (foreclosure prerequisites and standing considerations)
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (U.S. Supreme Court 1992) (standing as a jurisdictional requirement)
- Skipper, 9th Dist. No. 24772 (2009) (foreclosure procedure framework and standing considerations)