(A) Upon the return of any writ of execution for the satisfaction of which lands and tenements have been sold, on careful examination of the proceedings of the officer making the sale, if the court of common pleas finds that the sale was made, in all respects, in conformity with sections 2329.01 to 2329.61 of the Revised Code, it shall, within thirty days of the return of the writ, direct the clerk of the court of common pleas to make an entry on the journal that the court is satisfied of the legality of such sale. Nothing in this section prevents the court of common pleas from staying the confirmation of the sale to permit a property owner time to redeem the property or for any other reason that it determines is appropriate. In those instances, the sale shall be confirmed within thirty days after the termination of any stay of confirmation.
(B) The officer making the sale shall require the purchaser to pay within thirty days of the confirmation of the sale the balance due on the purchase price of the lands and tenements.
(C)(1) The officer making the sale shall record the prepared deed required by section 2329.36 of the Revised Code within fourteen days after the confirmation of sale and payment of the balance due.
(2)(a) If the deed is not prepared and recorded within the fourteen-day period, the purchaser may file a motion with the court to proceed with the transfer of title. If the court finds that a proper sale was made, it shall enter an order transferring the title of the lands and tenements to the purchaser, ordering the plaintiff to present a certified copy of the order to the county recorder for recording, and ordering the county recorder to record the order in the record of deeds. The order, when filed with the county recorder, shall have the same effect as a deed prepared pursuant to section 2329.36 of the Revised Code.
(b) Upon the issuance of the court order described in division (C)(2)(a) of this section, the plaintiff, or the plaintiff's attorney, shall present a certified copy of the order to be recorded in the office of the county recorder. The county recorder shall record the order in the record of deeds.
(c) The clerk shall issue a copy of the court order to the county auditor to transfer record ownership of the lands and tenements for the purpose of real estate taxes. Real estate taxes coming due after the date of the sale shall not prohibit the auditor from transferring ownership of the lands and tenements on its records or cause the recorder to deny recording. The real estate taxes shall become the responsibility of the new title holder of the lands and tenements. The sheriff shall not require the confirmation of sale to be amended for taxes not due and payable as of the date of the sale.
CitiMortgage, Inc. v. Roznowski (Slip Opinion), 2014 Ohio 1984 (Ohio 2014). · cites it 8דIn stating that before granting confirmation, the trial court must be “satisfied of the legality of such sale” pursuant to R.C. 2329.31, we did not preclude mortgagors from challenging on appeal damages determined during confirmation proceedings.”
Farmers State Bank v. Sponaugle (Slip Opinion), 2019 Ohio 2518 (Ohio 2019). · cites it 5דR.C. 2329.31. An appeal of the confirmation of sale is limited to challenging the confirmation order itself and to issues related to confirmation proceedings—for example, computation of the final total amount owed by the mortgagor, accrued interest, and amounts advanced by the…”
State ex rel. Midwest Pride IV, Inc. v. Pontious, 664 N.E.2d 931 (Ohio 1996). · cites it 2דIn authorizing the transfer of property upon confirmation of a sheriffs sale, R.C. 2329.31 provides: “Upon the return of any writ of execution for the satisfaction of which lands and tenements have been sold, on careful examination of the proceedings of the officer making the…”
Advantage Bank v. Waldo Pub., L.L.C., 2009 Ohio 2816 (Ohio Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 5דRI argues that the trial court lacked authority under R.C. 2329.31 to dismiss the highest bidder, Hardacre, and confirm sale to it as the second highest bidder.”
State ex rel. Midwest Pride IV, Inc. v. Pontious, 1996 Ohio 459 (Ohio 1996). · cites it 4ד{¶ 3} On August 2, 1994, before confirmation of the sale pursuant to R.C. 2329.31 (deed of property goes to purchaser if no irregularity in proceedings at sheriff’s sale), the Fayette County Treasurer moved to set the sale aside.”
State ex rel. Sponaugle v. Hein (Slip Opinion), 2018 Ohio 3155 (Ohio 2018). · cites it 2דBut for these precedents to be relevant, Sponaugle would have to demonstrate that the statute vesting the common pleas court with jurisdiction to issue a confirmation of sale, R.C. 2329.31, makes the existence of a final foreclosure order a jurisdictional prerequisite.”
Huntington Nat'l Bank v. Burch, 809 N.E.2d 55 (Ohio Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 4ד{¶ 2} Although a trial court must, pursuant to R.C. 2329.31, confirm a sale of property that is in conformity with R.”
Ohio Sav. Bank v. Ambrose, 563 N.E.2d 1388 (Ohio 1990). · cites it 2דThe land cannot be sold for less than two thirds of the appraised value. R.C. 2329.20. There is no statutory dictate that a hearing be held at this time.”
Sfjv 2005, L.L.C. v. Ream, 933 N.E.2d 819 (Ohio Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 2דR.C. 2329.31(A) requires the trial court, upon return of the writ of execution, to examine the sale proceedings and, if the sale was conducted according to law, to direct the clerk of court to make an appropriate entry and the attorney who filed the writ of execution to give the…”
Farmers State Bank v. Sponaugle, 2017 Ohio 4322 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2דPacific Fin. Serv., Inc., 11th Dist. Portage No.”
Third Fed. S.& L. Assn. of Cleveland v. Rains, 2012 Ohio 5708 (Ohio Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2ד{¶6} R.C. 2329.31 governs confirmation of judicial foreclosure sales and provides as follows: Upon return of any writ of execution for the satisfaction of which lands and tenements have been sold, on careful examination of the proceedings of the officer making the sale, if the…”
Mulby v. Poptic, 2012 Ohio 5731 (Ohio Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 3דThis court dismissed the appeal for lack of a final appealable order and indicated that after nine years of litigation, the trial court had yet to issue a final, separate order of foreclosure and a final order of confirmation that comported with R.C. 2329.31. Mulby v. Poptic,…”
CitiMortgage, Inc. v. Roznowski (Slip Opinion), 2014 Ohio 1984 (Ohio 2014). “In stating that before granting confirmation, the trial court must be “satisfied of the legality of such sale” pursuant to R.C. 2329.31, we did not preclude mortgagors from challenging on appeal damages determined during confirmation proceedings.”
Sfjv 2005, L.L.C. v. Ream, 933 N.E.2d 819 (Ohio Ct. App. 2010). “R.C. 2329.31(A) requires the trial court, upon return of the writ of execution, to examine the sale proceedings and, if the sale was conducted according to law, to direct the clerk of court to make an appropriate entry and the attorney who filed the writ of execution to give the…”
Farmers State Bank v. Sponaugle (Slip Opinion), 2019 Ohio 2518 (Ohio 2019). “R.C. 2329.31. An appeal of the confirmation of sale is limited to challenging the confirmation order itself and to issues related to confirmation proceedings—for example, computation of the final total amount owed by the mortgagor, accrued interest, and amounts advanced by the…”
State ex rel. Sponaugle v. Hein (Slip Opinion), 2018 Ohio 3155 (Ohio 2018). “But for these precedents to be relevant, Sponaugle would have to demonstrate that the statute vesting the common pleas court with jurisdiction to issue a confirmation of sale, R.C. 2329.31, makes the existence of a final foreclosure order a jurisdictional prerequisite.”
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.