JUDGMENT REVERSED: OHIO AFFIDAVIT FAILS TO PROFFER EVIDENCE V US BANK

9.02.10 OHIO APPEALS NO NOTE

In the instant case, the vast majority of evidence submitted by U.S. Bank in support of its motion for summary judgment could not be considered under Civ.R. 56 given that all of the documents attached to U.S. Bank’s motion were not properly incorporated into the affidavit submitted in support of the motion. Civ.R. 56(C), (E).    In its complaint, U.S. Bank alleged that it was the holder and owner of both the note and mortgage. In order to prevail in its motion for summary judgment, U.S. Bank was required to demonstrate an absence of dispute as to those alleged facts. However, the copy of the promissory note attached to U.S. Bank’s renewed motion for summary judgment was not incorporated into an affidavit, and thus, it was
1 We note that the trial court never ruled on Patricia Richards’ motion for a more definite statement.
7
not appropriately considered as evidence under Civ.R. 56. There was no evidence contemplated by Civ.R. 56 properly before the court demonstrating that U.S. Bank was the owner and holder of the promissory note and mortgage deed.

Posted in Uncategorized |