Cowguill v. Hall
Citations
- 2024 Ohio 6062
Syllabus
The trial court did not err by finding that appellants had no legal right to partition the property, as appellants only held an equitable mortgage. Under Ohio law, a deed intended to secure performance of an obligation may be treated as an equitable mortgage whether or not such interest is disclosed by the instrument. However, the trial court erred by setting the terms of the oral agreement/equitable mortgage, as that issue was not properly before the court.
Judges: Hendrickson
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCites
5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Vanderbilt v. Pier 27, L.L.C.Ohio Court of Appeals· 2013-11-25· cited 40×
- Ludwigsen v. Lakeside Plaza, L.L.C.Ohio Court of Appeals· 2014-12-15· cited 37×
- Malone v. MaloneOhio Court of Appeals· 1963-11-13· cited 6×
- Balfour v. HaymonOhio Court of Appeals· 2021-09-30· cited 3×
- Espy v. Interstate Food Serv., L.L.C.Ohio Court of Appeals· 2017-06-19· cited 1×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.