Avco Financial Services Loan, Inc. v. Hale, 86AP-727
Decision Date | 26 February 1987 |
Docket Number | No. 86AP-727,86AP-727 |
Parties | AVCO FINANCIAL SERVICES LOAN, INC., Appellant, v. HALE, et al., Appellees. |
Court | Ohio Court of Appeals |
Syllabus by the Court
1. The standard to apply for a dismissal pursuant to Civ.R. 12(B)(1), lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter, is whether the plaintiff has alleged any cause of action cognizable by the forum.
2. In a mortgage foreclosure action all persons acquiring an interest in the property after service and during the pendency of the suit are bound by the decree and the sale thereunder. In addition, while the foreclosure action is pending, no other action may be commenced concerning the property.
James J. Marlin, Jr., Columbus, for appellant.
Abroms & Weisz and Michael J. Weisz, Columbus, for appellees Raymond and Donna Hale.
Bricker & Eckler and James A. Readey, Columbus, for appellee Rickenbacker Port Authority.
Lerner, Sampson & Rothfuss and Rick D. DeBlasis, Cincinnati, for appellee Mfrs. Hanover Mortg. Corp.
On September 20, 1984, Manufacturers Hanover Mortgage Corporation ("Hanover") filed a complaint in foreclosure against Raymond and Donna Hale, Avco Financial Services Loan, Inc. ("Avco"), and BancOhio National Bank. Hanover was the first mortgage holder of a home owned by the Hales, and Avco was the second mortgage holder. On December 7, 1984, the court entered a judgment and decree in foreclosure. The property was to be sold and the proceeds disbursed in the following order of priority:
On February 11, 1985, Rickenbacker Port Authority ("RPA") executed an "Agreement for Preparation of a Noise Reduction Plan with the Village of Groveport." The agreement required RPA to implement various procedures and studies concerning the noise level in homes surrounding the Rickenbacker Airport. The agreement provided that, if the measures to reduce the interior noise level were unsuccessful, the RPA would purchase the homes qualifying under Section IX. Apparently, the Hales' property was located in this area.
Subsequently, on May 22, 1986, Avco brought the current suit against the Hales, RPA, and Hanover. In the complaint, Avco admitted that the realty for which it holds a second mortgage is in foreclosure by Hanover, as previously noted. The complaint then alleged that RPA has defaulted on its duties under the aforementioned agreement, by failing to either purchase the Hales' property or take steps to complete that purchase. Also, Avco alleged that the property has been seriously devalued, and its security interest affected by RPA's actions. Avco further alleged that it is a third-party beneficiary of the Hales. Judgment was demanded against RPA for:
On June 26, 1986, RPA filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Civ.R. 12(B)(1). On June 30, 1986, Hanover filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Civ.R. 12(B)(6). On July 23, 1986, the trial court granted both defendants' motions to dismiss.
Avco has appealed to this court, raising the following assignments...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Everhart v. Merrick Mfg. II LLC
...complaint." State ex rel. Bush v. Spurlock , 42 Ohio St.3d 77, 80, 537 N.E.2d 641 (1989), citing Avco Fin. Servs. Loan, Inc. v. Hale , 36 Ohio App.3d 65, 67, 520 N.E.2d 1378 (10th Dist.1987). Under Civ.R. 12(B)(1), a court may "consider outside matter attached to a motion to dismiss for lac......
-
Ford v. Tandy Transp., Inc.
...to decide. McHenry v. Indus. Comm. (1990), 68 Ohio App.3d 56, 62, 587 N.E.2d 414, 418; see, also, Avco Financial Serv. Loan, Inc. v. Hale (1987), 36 Ohio App.3d 65, 520 N.E.2d 1378. This is generally a question of law which we review independently of the trial court's decision. In determini......
-
Harrison v. Bishop
...complaint.” State ex rel. Bush v. Spurlock, 42 Ohio St.3d 77, 80, 537 N.E.2d 641 (1989), citing Avco Fin. Servs. Loan, Inc. v. Hale, 36 Ohio App.3d, 65, 67, 520 N.E.2d 1378 (10th Dist.1987). Appellate courts review a decision to dismiss under Civ.R. 12(B)(1) de novo, employing the same stan......
-
Cook v. Pitter Patter Learning Ctr.
...complaint." State ex rel. Bush v. Spurlock, 42 Ohio St.3d 77, 80, 537 N.E.2d 641 (1989), citing Avco Fin. Servs. Loan, Inc. v. Hale, 36 Ohio App.3d 65, 67, 520 N.E.2d 1378 (10th Dist.1987). "In determining whether a plaintiff has alleged a cause of action sufficient to withstand a Civ.R. 12......