I don’t know why we all love lists, but we seem to, especially at year’s end. So here’s the list of the top ten most visited blog posts in 2016:
- For the third year in a row, number one is Bank of America, N.A. v. George M. Kuchta, et al., 2013-0304. In Kuchta, the court held that a Civ. R. 60(B) motion cannot be used as a substitute for an appeal on the issue of standing in a foreclosure action, and cannot be used to collaterally attack the judgment. Additionally, the court held that a court that has subject-matter jurisdiction over an action does not lose that jurisdiction because a party to the action does not have standing in that particular case. Read the analysis of the merit decision here.
- Also taking second place for the third year in a row is Anderson v. Massillon, 2012-Ohio-5711, the case in which the court held that negligence, recklessness, willful and wanton misconduct represent different degrees of culpability, and defined all these terms. Read the analysis of the merit decision here.
- The case of SRMOF 2009-1 Trust v. Shari Lewis et al, 2014-0485 came in third, demonstrating the continuing strong interest in foreclosure-related matters. The issue in this one was whether the plaintiff in a foreclosure action must have an interest in both the note and mortgage to have standing, or if an interest in just one is good enough. But after hearing argument, the court dismissed the case as improvidently certified.
- The merit decision in Liming v. Damos, 2012-Ohio-4783. The court held that a purge hearing to impose a suspended sentence for failure to pay child support is a civil proceeding, and due process does not require the appointment of counsel for an indigent parent at the civil contempt purge hearing. This was number six last year, and moved up this year. Read the analysis of the merit decision here.
- Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v. Holden, 2016-Ohio-4603. This case took up the same issue as the dismissed Shari Lewis case, and held that Deutsche Bank did have standing to pursue the foreclosure action, and despite a bankruptcy discharge to the homeowners, to collect any deficiency on the note from the sale, but not from the homeowners personally. Whether and how you think the court actually answered the question note and mortgage or note or mortgage is up to you. Read an analysis of the merit decision here.
- D.W. v. T.L., 2012-Ohio-5743. A perennial favorite about how a child’s last name is determined when the parents aren’t married and disagree about it. The court held that under its existing precedent, the test in a name change case is the best interest of the child, which in this case was to keep the mother’s name. At position five last year. Read the analysis of the merit decision here.
- Titles of Former and Retired Judges, Revisited. Go figure.
- Linert v. Foutz, Slip Opinion No. 2016-Ohio-8445. The trial court properly refused to instruct the jury on the post-market duty of manufacturers to warn consumers of defects in products that are not discovered until after the product has been sold. I haven’t even had time to analyze this one yet. It was one of the last decisions released of the year.
- In re A.J., Slip Opinion No. 2016-Ohio-8196. A children’s services agency properly followed the administrative code in refusing to give temporary custody of a child to a relative in a substitute care setting. This case was submitted without argument.
- Foley v. Univ. of Dayton, Slip Opinion No. 2016-Ohio-7591. The court refused to recognize the tort of negligent misidentification. The case was accepted on certified questions from the United States District Court, Southern District of Ohio, Western Division Read the analysis of the merit decision here.