Mazaika v. Bank One, Columbus, N.A.

McEWEN, Judge:

The essential questions presented in this appeal by the demurrer of appellee1 are: Did the 38th Congress intend, by the Act of June 3, 1864, to delegate to Ohio the power to define the term “interest” for purposes of preempting all other states’ consumer protection laws, and, if, in fact, it did so intend, did the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Marquette National Bank v. First of Omaha Service Corp., *98439 U.S. 299, 99 S.Ct. 540, 58 L.Ed.2d 534 (1978), bestow that power upon the Ohio legislature?2 We pose a negative response to these inquiries and, accordingly,…