Legal Opinion

Central Trust Co. v. Jensen

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided August 18, 1993No. 92-1376PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMoyer, C.J.

The question certified for our review is “whether a party to a foreclosure action or a person with an interest in the foreclosure sale is entitled to actual notice by mail where his address is known or whether the Ohio statutory requirement of notice by publication is sufficient to satisfy due process.” Our review of the principles of due process in this context convinces us that notice by publication to a person with a property interest in a proceeding is insufficient when that person’s address is known or easily ascertainable. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.

In…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
  3. Parratt v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  4. Mennonite Board of Missions v. AdamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  5. Tulsa Professional Collection Services, Inc. v. PopeSupreme Court of the United States · 1988

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. United States v. Anthony P. Perry v. Tryllous Hossler, Intervenor-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2004
  2. PHH Mortgage Corp. v. PraterOhio Supreme Court · 2012
  3. Galt Alloys, Inc. v. KeyBank National Ass'nOhio Supreme Court · 1999
  4. Principal Residential Mortgage, Inc. v. NashNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2000
  5. Allen-Baker v. ShifflerLucas County Court of Common Pleas · 1998

17 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