Hausman v. Dayton
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
[This opinion has been published in Ohio Official Reports at 73 Ohio St.3d 671.] HAUSMAN ET AL., APPELLEES AND CROSS-APPELLANTS; BANCOHIO NATIONAL BANK, APPELLEE AND CROSS-APPELLEE, v. CITY OF DAYTON, APPELLANT AND CROSS-APPELLEE. [Cite as Hausman v. Dayton,
1995-Ohio-277.] Real property—Effect of default by mortgagor on legal title—Right of redemption is the mortgagor’s right to take prescribed action to satisfy a debt secured by a mortgage and therefore cannot be construed as a “setoff,” 1. After a mortgagor defaults, legal title passes to the mortgagee only as between the mortgagor and the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Mominee v. ScherbarthOhio Supreme Court · 1986
- Geiger v. GeigerOhio Supreme Court · 1927
- State ex rel. Maurer v. ShewardOhio Supreme Court · 1994
- Hausman v. City of DaytonOhio Supreme Court · 1995
- Schneider v. LaffoonOhio Supreme Court · 1965
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- CitiMortgage, Inc. v. Roznowski (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2014
- State v. Noling (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2016
- Kramer v. Angel's Path, L.L.C.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2007
- State ex rel. Ohio Academy of Trial Lawyers v. ShewardOhio Supreme Court · 1999
- Abroms v. Synergy Bldg. Sys.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2011
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.