Tuesday, November 20, 2012

Unresolved Issues May Leave Recent Ohio High Court Court Foreclosure Ruling In Limbo; Losing Bankster Asks State Supremes To Address 'Lack Of Standing' v. 'Lack Of Subject Matter Jurisdiction'; 'Void Judgment' v. 'Voidable Judgment'


The foreclosure litigation in a recent big homeowner victory in the Ohio Supreme Court in Fed. Home Loan Mtge. Corp. v. Schwartzwald is apparently not over as the bankster in this case filed a motion for reconsideration in which it asks the court to clarify certain matters that weren't resolved in the ruling.

From the Motion For Reconsideration:

  1. The Court should clarify whether a plaintiff's failure to prove standing as of the filing of a complaint deprives a common pleas court of subject matter jurisdiction;
    .........................
  2. If the Court in fact held that a plaintiff's lack of standing as of the filing of a complaint deprives a common pleas court of subject matter jurisdiction, then the Court should only apply that rule prospectively;
    ........................
  3. Because Defendants-Appellants Duane and Julie Schwartzwald did not seek a stay of the execution proceedings and the property at issue has since been sold to a third party, the Court should remand this case to the common pleas court to permit Freddie Mac to prove that it in fact had standing as of the filing of the Complaint, and to instruct the common pleas court to only dismiss the case without prejudice if Freddie Mac cannot do so.
From the Memorandum In Support Of Motion For Reconsideration:
  • The Opinion is unclear as to whether the Court intended to hold that a plaintiff's failure to have standing and its inability to "invoke the jurisdiction" of the court deprives a common pleas court of subject matter jurisdiction. That distinction is crucial, as a judgment rendered by a court without subject matter jurisdiction is void (and not merely voidable).

    If the Court did intend to hold that a plaintiff's failure to have standing deprives a common pleas court of subject matter jurisdiction, then the Opinion changed the law of Ohio,and threw into question judgments rendered in literally hundreds of thousands of foreclosure actions (and potentially every judgment ever rendered in this state). If a plaintiff's lack of standing deprives a common pleas court of subject matter jurisdiction, then Plaintiff-Appellee Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation ("Freddie Mac") respectfully suggests that the Opinion be limited to prospective application only.

    Finally, following the common pleas court's judgment in this case, Defendants-Appellants Duane and Julie Schwartzwald did not seek a stay of the sheriff's sale, and the property has been sold to a third party.1 The Opinion's dismissal of this case without prejudice leaves the parties in an unusual position. To avoid this case once again being returned to the appellate process, Freddie Mac requests that this case be remanded to the common pleas court and that it be afforded the opportunity to show that it in fact had standing as of the filing of the Complaint.
Go here for the entire Motion For Reconsideration and the accompanying Memorandum in support thereof for the full discussion of the issues as contained in the recent court filings.

Thanks to Deontos for the heads-up on these latest developments.

No comments: