from the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas (C.P.C. No.
Lerner, Sampson & Rothfuss, Rick D. DeBlasis and William
P. Leaman, for appellee.
McGeorge Legal Services, LLC, and Anthony McGeorge, for
appellant Global Capital Partners.
1} Defendant-appellant, Global Capital Partners, LLC
("Global"), appeals a judgment of the Franklin
County Court of Common Pleas that granted summary judgment to
plaintiff-appellee, Ditech Financial, LLC
("Ditech"). For the following reasons, we affirm
2} CitiMortgage, Inc., the original plaintiff in
this case, filed a complaint in foreclosure on June 24, 2016.
In the complaint, CitiMortgage alleged that June Strickland
had entered into a note, which was secured by a mortgage on
property located at 2376 Marcia Drive in Columbus, Ohio.
CitiMortgage asserted that it had possession of the note, a
default on the note had occurred, it had performed all the
conditions precedent set forth in the note and mortgage, and
it had accelerated the debt owed. CitiMortgage did not seek a
personal judgment for breach of the note because Strickland
had died on June 3, 2015. Instead, CitiMortgage requested
only that the trial court foreclose on the mortgage, sell the
property, and pay it out of the proceeds of the sale.
CitiMortgage named Global as a defendant in the foreclosure
action because, as trustee of the 2376 Marcia Drive Trust,
Global was the property's titleholder at the time
CitiMortgage filed suit.
3} Approximately four months after filing its
complaint, CitiMortgage moved for an order substituting
Ditech as plaintiff. CitiMortgage represented in its motion
that Ditech had become the holder of the note and mortgage
executed by Strickland. In an order dated October 18, 2016,
the trial court granted CitiMortgage's motion and
substituted Ditech as plaintiff in place of CitiMortgage.
4} On November 7, 2016, Ditech achieved
service of the complaint and summons on Global. Global filed
an answer to the complaint 29 days later, on December 6,
5} On January 23, 2017, Global moved for an order
requiring the parties to participate in mediation. Global
also requested that the trial court stay the proceedings
until the completion of mediation. The trial court granted
Global's motion in an order dated February 9, 2017.
6} Mediation occurred on March 30, 2017. In an order
issued that same date, the magistrate overseeing the
mediation reported that the parties were unable to reach a
7} Ditech moved for summary judgment in its favor on
March 31, 2017. Global did not respond with a memorandum in
opposition to Ditech's motion. Rather, Global filed a
Civ.R. 56(F) motion asking the trial court to refuse
Ditech's motion or, alternatively, to grant Global
additional time in which to conduct discovery. Global
informed the trial court that it needed 60 additional days in
order to complete discovery and respond to Ditech's
motion for summary judgment.
8} On June 5, 2017, the trial court issued a
judgment denying Global relief under Civ.R. 56(F) and
granting Ditech summary judgment. Global now appeals that
judgment, and it assigns the following error:
The Trial Court abused its discretion by granting
Appellee's Motion for Summary Judgment because there were
genuine issues of fact and Appellee was not entitled to
judgment as a matter of law; furthermore, ...