Bank of New York Mellon v. Fisher

Citations

• 2020 Ohio 4742

Syllabus

Foreclosure motion for summary judgment in blank indorsement allonge multiple versions of the note supplemental affidavit attached to reply brief loan modification agreement possession of the original note enforceability of the note Evid.R. 901 authentication Evid.R. 1003 personal knowledge payment history conditions precedent notice of default Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and invasion of privacy. The trial court's decision to grant plaintiff-appellee's motion for summary judgment was appropriate where the record demonstrated no genuine issues of material fact existed for trial. A supplemental affidavit attached to the plaintiff-appellee's reply brief that clarified previously raised issues was correctly considered by the trial court. The execution of a loan modification agreement did not transfer the note holder's interest to the loan servicer. Enforceability of the note was demonstrated by the plaintiff-appellee's possession of the instrument, with an in blank indorsement, at the time the foreclosure complaint was filed. The existence of an undated allonge and an in blank indorsement, both assigning the note to the plaintiff-appellee, did not refute the plaintiff-appellee's status as holder of the note or create a genuine issue of material fact. The affidavits provided by the loan servicer's employee authenticated the documents affixed to the foreclosure complaint. The plaintiff-appellee's notice of default letter clearly explained the defendants-appellants' rights of reinstatement and referenced the rights of reinstatement detailed in their mortgage so as to satisfy the conditions precedent mandated before filing the foreclosure action. The defendants-appellants' counterclaims that presented a violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and an invasion of privacy were correctly dismissed pursuant to summary judgment.