CIVIL APPEAL FROM BUTLER COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Case No. CV2012-01-206
Carlisle, McNellie, Rini, Kramer & Ulrich Co., LPA, Eric T. Deighton and C. Scott Casterline, for plaintiff-appellee
James E. Kolenich, for defendant-appellant, Audrey Bonner
Nicole Randall, Collections Enforcement Section, for defendant, State of Ohio, Department of Taxation
Nicholas J. Pantel, for defendant, United States of America
Peter Saba, for defendant, Gristmill at Waldon Ponds & Waldon Ponds Home Owners Association
Michael T. Gmoser, for defendant, Butler County Environmental Services
M. POWELL, J.
(¶ 1} Defendant-appellant, Audrey Bonner, appeals a decision of the Butler County Court of Common Pleas granting summary judgment and a decree of foreclosure in favor of plaintiff-appellee, Central Mortgage Company (Central Mortgage). For the reasons stated below, we affirm the judgment of foreclosure.
(¶ 2} On February 29, 2008, Bonner executed a promissory note in favor of Vandyk Mortgage Corporation (Vandyk), in the principal amount of $241, 775 to purchase a home in Hamilton, Ohio. The note was secured by a mortgage on the property. The loan was modified twice, in 2010 and in 2011. Later, Vandyk assigned its interest in the mortgage to Central Mortgage.
(¶ 3} Central Mortgage filed a foreclosure complaint against Bonner on January 17, 2012. Subsequently, Central Mortgage moved for summary judgment. In support of its summary judgment motion, Central Mortgage submitted an affidavit of Janice Davis, Vice-President of Central Mortgage and attached the originally executed note and mortgage between Bonner and Vandyk. Central Mortgage also attached two loan modification agreements between Vandyk and Bonner. Lastly, Central Mortgage included the document that assigned the mortgage from Vandyk to Central Mortgage.
(¶ 4} In response, Bonner filed a memorandum in opposition to summary judgment and a motion to strike Davis' affidavit arguing that the documents attached to the affidavit were hearsay and not authenticated. The trial court overruled Bonner's motion to strike, finding that the documents were admissible under the business records exception specified in Evid.R. 803(6). The court then granted summary judgment in favor of Central Mortgage.
(¶ 5} Bonner appeals the trial court's decision, asserting a sole assignment of error:
(¶ 6} THE COURT ERRED TO THE PREJUDICE OF THE DEFENDANT BY GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT TO ...