Legal Opinion

Huntington Natl. Bank v. Haehn

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided December 6, 2018No. 17AP-342PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKlatt, J.

{¶ 1} Defendant-appellant, Chris Haehn, appeals a judgment of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas granting the foreclosure sought by plaintiff-appellee, The Huntington National Bank ("Huntington"). For the following reasons, we affirm that judgment.

{¶ 2} On March 12, 2004, Haehn executed a note in which he promised to pay $244,000, plus interest, to his lender, Sky Bank. Haehn also granted Sky Bank a mortgage on his residence, located at 93 W. King Avenue, to secure the note.

{¶ 3} In 2007, Sky Bank merged into Huntington. At that point, Huntington assumed Sky Bank's interest in Haehn's…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Seasons Coal Co. v. City of ClevelandOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  2. C. E. Morris Co. v. Foley Construction Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1978
  3. Eastley v. VolkmanOhio Supreme Court · 2012
  4. State v. PowellOhio Supreme Court · 2012
  5. Continental Insurance v. WhittingtonOhio Supreme Court · 1994

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Ltd. Invest. Group Corp. v. Huntington Natl. BankOhio Court of Appeals · 2022
  2. New Technology Products Pty, Ltd. v. Scotts Miracle-Gro Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2022
  3. Maxwell v. LombardiOhio Court of Appeals · 2022
  4. Pond v. PondOhio Court of Appeals · 2021
  5. U.S. Bank Natl. Assn. v. BirovsekOhio Court of Appeals · 2019

2 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