Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Potts
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtWright, J.
The initial issue that we must decide involves two questions. First, as a matter of law, does R.C. 1317.12, 1317.16 or 1309.47 require a secured creditor to take steps beyond sending notice of sale (and, if sent together, notice of right to cure), by certified mail to the debtor’s last known address? Second, do these statutes stay the creditor’s right to sell the collateral until after the creditor receives the certified mail receipt showing that the notice was delivered as addressed?
The second issue before us is whether, as a matter of law, Ford Motor’s sale of the debtor’s vehicle was…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Umbaugh Pole Building Co. v. ScottOhio Supreme Court · 1979
- First National Bank of New Bremen v. TurnerOhio Court of Appeals · 1981
- Huntington National Bank v. StockwellOhio Court of Appeals · 1983
- BancOhio National Bank v. FreelandOhio Court of Appeals · 1984
3Cited by10 opinions
- Ford Motor Credit Co. v. RussellCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1994
- Huntington National Bank v. ElkinsOhio Supreme Court · 1990
- Kruse v. Voyager Insurance CompaniesOhio Supreme Court · 1995
- Society Bank, N.A. v. CazeaultOhio Court of Appeals · 1993
- In Re OttUnited States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · 2002
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.