Umbaugh Pole Building Co. v. Scott
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtPottek, J.
The first proposition of law advanced by the appellant is worded as follows:
“A lending institution does not have any fiduciary •duty to its debtor even if ‘advice and counselling’ are offered to the debtor by the institution.”
Both on the record and on the law we find that said proposition of law, to the extent hereinafter set forth, is well taken. The relationship of debtor and creditor without more is not a fiduciary relationship. A fiduciary relationship may be created out of an informal relationship, but this is done only when both parties understand that a special trust or confidence has…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Columbus Finance, Inc. v. HowardOhio Supreme Court · 1975
- In re Termination of Employment of PrattOhio Supreme Court · 1974
- Hall v. Owen County State BankIndiana Court of Appeals · 1977
- DeLay First National Bank & Trust Co. v. Jacobson Appliance Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1976
- Chase Manhattan Bank, N. A. v. NatarelliNew York Supreme Court · 1977
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by123 opinions
- Payton v. Abbott LabsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982
- Belvedere Condominium Unit Owners' Ass'n v. R.E. Roark Companies, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1993
- Ed Schory & Sons, Inc. v. FrancisOhio Supreme Court · 1996
- Stone v. DavisOhio Supreme Court · 1981
- Groob v. KeyBankOhio Supreme Court · 2006
118 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.