The title to property, which title is the subject of a final judgment or order sought to be vacated, modified, or set aside by any type of proceeding or attack and which title has, by, in consequence of, or in reliance upon the final judgment or order, passed to a purchaser in good faith, shall not be affected by the proceeding or attack; nor shall the title to property that is sold before judgment under an attachment be affected by the proceeding or attack. "Purchaser in good faith," as used in this section, includes a purchaser at a duly confirmed judicial sale.
This section does not apply if in the proceeding resulting in the judgment or order sought to be vacated, modified, or set aside, the person then holding the title in question was not lawfully served with process or notice, as required by the law or Civil Rules applicable to the proceeding.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1956–2024 · leading case: Fannie Mae v. Hicks, 2016-Ohio-8484.
Fannie Mae v. Hicks, 2016-Ohio-8484. · cites it 8דHer opposition brief argued that the plain language of R.C. 2325.03 and 2329.45 prevents Fannie Mae from returning title, and that the correct remedy in situations where property is sold pending appeal and the judgment is reversed is to order restitution.”
Fifth Third Bank, Natl. Assn. v. Audia, 2024-Ohio-3374, 252 N.E.3d 571. · cites it 3ד{¶19} Audia also referenced R.C. 2325.03 in support of her claim that this case is not moot.”
Farmers State Bank v. Sponaugle, 2017-Ohio-4322, 92 N.E.3d 355. “Upon the entry of a final appealable judgment and decree of foreclosure, the trial court may again order the sale of the property. DONOVAN, J., concurs. The Sponaugles later sought reconsideration of the summary judgment ruling and an opportunity to file a responsive memorandum.”
Hummer v. Hummer, 2011-Ohio-3767. “Although the court has broad discretion in determining the amount of the bond, an adequate bond 7 See R.C. 2325.03 - Title of purchaser in good faith not affected by attack on judgment by which he obtained title, purchasers in good faith include purchasers at judicial sales; and…”
Fannie Mae v. Hicks, 2016-Ohio-7483, 65 N.E.3d 782. · cites it 8דHer opposition brief argued that the plain language of R.C. 2325.03 and 2329.45 prevents Fannie Mae from returning title, and that the correct remedy in situations where property is sold pending appeal and the judgment is reversed is to order restitution.”
Urban v. Folan, 2021-Ohio-3452. “See R.C. 2325.03 (“The title to property, which title is the subject of a final judgment or order sought to be vacated, modified, or set aside by any type of proceeding or attack and which title has, by, in consequence of, or in reliance upon the final judgment or order, passed…”
U.S. Bank Natl. Assn. v. Marcino, 2010-Ohio-6512. · cites it 2ד03 provides that title to property passing to a purchaser in good faith including a purchaser at a duly confirmed judicial sale is unaffected by an attack on the final judgment involving the property. {¶12} Courts have interpreted this statutory language to mean that the…”
Blisswood Vill. Home Owners Assn. v. Genesis Real Est. Holdings Grp., L.L.C., 2018-Ohio-1080. · cites it 2ד45 because Hicks failed to meet the requirements of the statute that, according to Fannie Mae, requires that the property be unrecoverable and that Hicks had previously obtained a stay of the distribution of proceeds.”
Cuyahoga Cty. Treasurer v. Fitzgerald, 2022-Ohio-4386. · cites it 5ד26 requires that she, the homeowner, receive written notice of the sheriff’s sale, the trial court’s docket provided insufficient notice of the sale, and the property’s sale to Riveredge does not render her appeal moot because R.C. 2325.03 recognizes an exception to usual…”
Ocwen Loan Servicing v. Sayre, 2019-Ohio-3491. · cites it 7ד18AP-335 4 {¶ 18} By her first assignment of error, Sayre argues that the trial court erred in extending the protection of R.C. 2325.03 to Fannie Mae. We disagree with the premise of Sayre's argument, i.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.