X hits on this document





12 / 15

meets this burden, summary judgment will be appropriate if the nonmovant fails

to establish the existence of a genuine issue of material fact. Id. at 293.

{¶ 31} Generally, an oral hearing is not required on a motion for summary

judgment. See Hooten v. Safe Auto Ins. Co., 100 Ohio St.3d 8, 2003-Ohio-4829.

Further, a trial court need not notify the parties of the date of consideration of a

motion for summary judgment or the deadlines for submitting briefs and Civ.R.

56 materials if a local rule of court provides sufficient notice of the hearing date

or submission deadlines. Id. at 17.

{¶ 32} In this case, the record does not reflect that any party requested an

oral hearing on the motion for summary judgment. Pursuant to Loc.R. 11(I) of

the Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court, the court could hear the matter on

the briefs and accompanying evidentiary materials without oral argument.

Further, the rule provides adequate notice of the submission deadlines for

summary judgment motions and opposition briefs.

{¶ 33} Deutsche Bank’s motion for summary judgment was filed on July 25,

2008. Deutsche Bank supported the motion with affidavits showing that it was

the holder of the note and a valid first mortgage on the property, that the

mortgage was in default and the debt had been accelerated, and that there was a

balance of $79,639.89 due and owing with interest thereon. Appellants never

filed a brief in opposition to the motion, and despite making appearances in

court, they never requested an extension of time to file an opposition brief.

Document info
Document views14
Page views14
Page last viewedFri Oct 21 09:36:28 UTC 2016