Legal Opinion

Wilborn v. Bank One Corp.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided February 3, 2009No. 2007-0558PublishedCited by 162 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCupp, J.

{¶ 1} In this case we decide whether a provision in a residential-mortgage contract requiring a borrower to pay the lender’s attorney fees as a condition of reinstatement of the borrower’s defaulted mortgage after the lender initiates foreclosure proceedings violates Ohio’s public policy. Because we conclude that such a provision does not violate public policy, we affirm the court of appeals’ judgment.

I

{¶ 2} The 11 plaintiff-appellants (“borrowers”) in this matter filed a class-action complaint in August 2003 against various financial institutions (“lenders”), defendant-appellees herein. One…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Nottingdale Homeowners' Ass'n v. DarbyOhio Supreme Court · 1987
  2. Neal v. State Farm Insurance CompaniesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
  3. Worth v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1987
  4. Hausman v. City of DaytonOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  5. State Ex Rel. Beebe v. CowleyOhio Supreme Court · 1927

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by162 opinions

  1. Phoenix Lighting Group, L.L.C. v. Genlyte Thomas Group, L.L.C. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020
  2. Dawson Wise v. Zwicker & Associates PCCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2015
  3. Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v. Holden (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2016
  4. State ex rel. Doe v. SmithOhio Supreme Court · 2009
  5. Becker v. Direct Energy, LPOhio Court of Appeals · 2018

157 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API