Sometimes a client comes to the Finney Law Firm concerned about their neighbor’s rights to an easement over their land leading to the question: who has the duty to maintain and repair the easement? A big concern for these clients is the cost of the maintenance and repair of the easement. These easements tend be associated with driveways and sewer lines. This blog post is designed provide some general background as to what easements are and address the cost concern for individuals in similar situations.

Background on easements

An easement is an interest that may burden another persons’ land. The interest entitles the owner of the easement to use the land in some limited way. The extent of that interest is determined by the process which creates the easement.

There are two kinds of easements, the easement appurtenant, and the easement in gross. The easement appurtenant deal with two pieces of land (e.g., two neighboring parcels) and tend to be conveyed with a sale of the land. The easement in gross deal with one piece of land (e.g., one parcel and another person’ right to use the one parcel) and tend to not be conveyed with a sale of the land.

This blog post deals with easements appurtenant.

Creation

An easement may be created by deed, prescription, or implication from the particular set of facts and circumstances. Likewise, some courts allow for an equitable easement, which is referred to as an easement by estoppel. The owner of the easement’s land is called the dominant estate. The dominant estate benefits from the easement. The burdened land is referend to as the servient estate.

Who maintains and repairs?

Generally, it is the duty of the dominant estate to maintain and repair the easement. Likewise, the dominant estate must make the necessary repairs to prevent the dominant estate from created an annoyance or nuisance to the servient estate.

That said, the servient estate can expressly undertake the duty to maintain and repair the easement. This may be done in many ways (e.g., through a maintenance agreement, a grant in a deed, or operation of law).

What if the servient estate also uses the easement?

The servient estate may also use the land on which the dominant estate enjoys an easement. However, that use must be in a way that is not contrary to the dominant estate’s limited use of the land. When an easement is used jointly by the dominant estate and the servient estate, the cost of maintenance and repair of such easement must be apportioned between the dominant estate and the servient estate, based on relative use.

Conclusion

So, if you have a similar situation to those clients that come to the Finney Law Firm concerned about their neighbor’s rights to an easement over their land and who bears the maintenance and repair costs, then it might be time to call the Finney Law Firm.

 

“A mortgage is a conveyance of property to secure the performance of some obligation, which is designed to come void upon due performance thereof.”[1] The Ohio Revised Code characterizes mortgages as “liens.”[2] Mortgage liens are only applicable to real property, as with the land and the buildings attached to it.

Mortgagors (the party granting the mortgage) tend to grant mortgages to secure payment of money from the mortgagee (the party granting a loan in consideration for the mortgage).[3] The instrument evidencing the debt secured by the mortgage is generally referred to as a “note.” However, mortgagors may grant mortgages to secure the performance of other obligations, like an environmental indemnification.

Notes and mortgages, as contracts, are negotiable by the parties to them. As such, notes and mortgages include all sorts of obligations and remedies. That said, there are three basic remedies that a mortgagee can pursue to enforce the note and mortgage.[4] Mortgages can pursue all three of the following remedies at the same time or separately.[5] However, in doing so, a mortgagee must keep in mind the different statute of limitations periods for each remedy.

(1) An action on the debt secured by the mortgage (the note).

When a mortgagee brings an action on the debt secured by the mortgage, the mortgagee is bringing an action for a personal judgment debt evidenced by the note against the mortgagor (or any other maker of the note, even if they did not sign the mortgage).[6]

In Ohio, written instruments, such as notes, have a six-year statute of limitations, running from the due date(s) or, if applicable, the date the debt is accelerated.[7] When the statute of limitations runs on the note, the mortgagee can still go after the mortgagor with a foreclosure action, as the statute of limitations on the mortgage is longer. The statute of limitations for the foreclosure does not run by virtue of the statute of limitations on the note running.[8]

(2) An action to foreclose on the mortgaged property.

When a mortgagee brings an action to foreclose on the mortgaged property, the mortgagee is attempting to secure the mortgagee’s conditional interest (conditional on mortgagor default) in the property.[9] If the mortgagee succeeds here, the mortgagee will have superior title to the property than that of the mortgagor.[10] The go-to remedy for mortgagees is that of an action to foreclose on the mortgaged property.[11]

In Ohio, foreclosure actions have an eight-year statute of limitations, running from the date that the breach occurred.[12] The statute of limitations for foreclosures was changed from fifteen years to eight years on September 28, 2012.[13] For breaches that occurred before September 28, 2012, the statute of limitations runs at the end of the fifteen-year period from the breach or September 27, 2020, whichever is earlier.[14]

(3) An action of ejectment against the occupier of the mortgaged property.[15]

When a mortgagee brings an action of ejectment against the occupier of the mortgaged property, the mortgagee is attempting to take possession of the property.[16] In doing this, the mortgagee is taking advantage of the mortgagee’s superior title to the property to that of the mortgagor. [17]

In Ohio, ejectment actions have a twenty-one-year statute of limitations, running from the date that the mortgage becomes due.[18]

The aforementioned information regarding the statute of limitations does not apply to the mortgage itself. A mortgage, that is unsatisfied or unreleased of record, remains in effect for twenty-one-years from the date of the mortgage or twenty-one-years from the date of the maturity date (if any), whichever is later.[19] This, however, deals more with the purchasing of encumbered property free from the prior mortgage, and the mortgagee’s ability to enforce a prior mortgage against purchaser.

If you, as a mortgagee, have a mortgagor in default and want to enforce the note, mortgage, or both, call the Finney Law Firm today!

[1] Barnets, Inc. v. Johnson, Case No. CA2004-02-005, 2005 Ohio App. LEXIS 703, *8 (Ohio App. 12th Dist. Feb. 22, 2005), citing Brown v. First Nat. Bank, 44 Ohio St. 269, 274 (1886).

[2] Barnets, at *8.

[3] Barnets. at *9.

[4] Barnets, at *9.

[5] Barnets, at *9.

[6] United States Bank Nat’l Ass’n v. O’Malley, 150 N.E.3d 532 (Ohio App. 8th Dist. Dec. 26, 2019).

[7] ORC Section 1303.16.

[8] O’Malley, at 532.

[9] O’Malley, at 532.

[10] Search Mgmt. L.L.C. v. Fillinger, 2020 Ohio App. LEXIS 1966, *1.

[11] Barnets, at *9.

[12] ORC Section 2305.06.

[13]Ohio Real Property Law and Practice § 19.10 (2020).

[14] Ohio Real Property Law and Practice § 19.10 (2020)

[15] Barnets, at *9.

[16] Fillinger, at *1.

[17] Fillinger, at *1.

[18] Cont’l W. Reserve v. Island Dev. Corp., 1997 Ohio App. LEXIS 962, *1.

[19] ORC Section 5301.30.

Contractors, laborers, and materialmen tend to run into issues receiving payment for their work on certain projects. A terrific way for contractors, laborers, and materialmen to guard against not getting paid is to attach a Mechanic’s Lien to the property on which the contractors, laborers, and materialmen performed their work. From an extremely general point of view, to perfect a Mechanic’s Lien, contractors, laborers, and materialmen must file an “Affidavit for Mechanic’s Lien,” with the recorder’s office in the county where the property is located.

It is key to remember that there are time limits that must be adhered to on the front end and back end of filing an Affidavit for Mechanic’s Lien.

The Front End

When it comes to the front end, the time limit will vary based on the type of project.

If the Mechanic’s Lien is associated with a residential property, like a family home or condominium, then a contractor, laborer, or materialman claiming a Mechanic’s Lien has sixty (60) days from the date that the last labor was performed, or material was provided by the contractor, laborer, or materialman.[1]

If a Mechanic’s Lien is associated with oil or gas wells or facilities, then a contractor, laborer, or materialman claiming a Mechanic’s Lien has one hundred and twenty (120) days from the date that the last labor was performed, or material was provided by the contractor, laborer, or materialman.[2]

For all other Mechanic’s Liens, a contractor, laborer, or materialman claiming a Mechanic’s Lien has one seventy-five (75) days from the date that the last labor was performed, or material was provided by the contractor, laborer, or materialman.[3]

The Back End

ORC Section 1311.13 deals with attachment of liens, continuance, and priority. ORC Section 1311.13(C) states that Mechanic’s Liens, under sections 1311.01 to 1311.24, continue for six years after the Affidavit for Mechanic’s Lien is filed with the county recorder, as required by ORC Section 1311. If a cause of action based on a Mechanic’s Lien is brought within the six years, then the Mechanic’s Lien will continue “in force until final adjudication thereof.”

If a cause of action based on a Mechanic’s Lien is not brought within the six-year period, then the rights associated with the Mechanic’s Lien are extinguished.[4] Thus, there is a six-year statute of limitations to bring a cause of action based on a Mechanic’s Lien.[5] Furthermore, “the statutory scheme for the filing and enforcement of [M]echanic’s [L]iens does not provide for the tolling or expansion of designated statutory time limits.”[6]

If you have a Mechanic’s Lien and need to act, please feel free to reach out to the Finney Law Firm, before it is too late!

_____________________

[1] ORC Ann. 1311.06(B)(1).

[2] ORC Ann. 1311.06(B)(2).

[3] ORC Ann. 1311.06(B)(2).

[4] Banner Constr. Co. v. Koester, 2000 Ohio App. LEXIS 1313, *1.

[5] Id.

[6] Id.

Every year, the Auditor of each of Ohio’s 88 counties publishes a chart like this showing the tax rates for each taxing district in each County.

In Hamilton County, there are 241 distinct taxing districts, each having a complex calculation to develop the net residential and commercial rates of taxation (taxing districts being greater in number than either municipalities and townships or school districts, because the boundaries of some frequently overlap one another). Here are the five highest commercial and residential taxing districts in Hamilton County:

Highest Commercial rates
MunicipalityTownshipSchool DistrictCommercial millageCommercial percentage
WyomingSpringfieldFinneytown135.544.765%
ColombiaMariemont131.3564.618%
SpringfieldFinneytown128.5894.521%
Lincoln HeightsPrinceton123.754.351%
Mt. HealthySpringfieldMt. Healthy121.6654.277%
Highest Residential rates
MunicipalityTownshipSchool DistrictResidential millageResidential percentage
Lincoln HeightsPrinceton111.4663.919%
WyomingSpringfieldFinneytown110.3443.879%
Mt. HealthySpringfieldMt. Healthy104.6193.678%
SpringfieldFinneytown103.3943.635%
Golf ManorCincinnati101.263.560%

As you can see, several Hamilton County commercial districts well exceed 4.0% in annual tax rates (approaching 5.0%) and the highest residential rates are bumping up against the 4.0% threshold.

 

One of Joe Biden’s first acts as President yesterday was extending the residential eviction moratorium until March 31, 2021. Read the CDC statement on that here.

We are hearing there will be extensive changes to the moratorium processes and procedures that will tilt the scales decidedly in favor of non-paying tenants. We will keep our blog readers updated on those changes as they occur.

The CDC in its release attributes the moratorium to “a housing affordability crisis” that they now place even more so on the books and backs of landlords to resolve.

We are proud to announce that experienced real estate attorney Bruce G. Hopkins today joined the transactional group at Finney Law Firm. Bruce and Chris Finney practiced law together in the real estate group at Frost & Jacobs (now Frost, Brown Todd) at the beginning of their careers, so this is a long-delayed reunion of careers.

His practice is focused on retail and mixed-use projects, including development, leasing, resolution and litigation of disputes with tenants, purchases and sales, due diligence, management and operations matters.  He frequently works on investment-grade properties located across the United States.

Prior to becoming a lawyer, Bruce worked for almost a decade in the real estate industry doing commercial real estate appraisal work, commercial real estate lending and development for a major life insurance company, and commercial real estate development and management for a private developer.

Read more about Bruce here and let us know how Bruce can help your real estate project.

 

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Friday clarified the nationwide eviction moratorium that it had issued on September 4, 2020, lasting through the end of the year. That clarification (“Frequently Asked Questions”) is linked here.

Some important points from the FAQ:

  • The Order does not prevent owners from commencing eviction proceedings so long as the actual eviction (which we interpret to mean the set out) does not take place until January. As we see it, this means that evictions can proceed to writ, but the set out must wait until January.
  • As set forth in this blog entry, the protection to a tenant under the eviction moratorium is trigged when the tenant signs a CDC form that certifies all of the following (every adult residing in the unit must sign the form for the moratorium to take effect).
    • The individual has used best efforts to obtain government assistance for the payment of rent.
    • The individual falls below the above-income thresholds.
    • The individual can’t pay rent due to loss of income or medical expenses.
    • The individual is using best efforts to pay the rent or as much of it as he can.
    • Eviction would render the individual homeless.
  • An owner may cross examine (or perhaps conduct discovery as the Court would allow) as to the truthfulness of those certifications. Previously, the rule was ambiguous on this point, leading to inconsistent application throughout the thousands of jurisdictions handling executions in the nation.
  • Landlord are not required to inform tenants of their rights under the CDC Order.
  • The clarification reiterates that (a) tenants still owe their rent and (b) tenants have a duty to make partial rent payments as they are able.
  • The clarification reiterates the criminal penalties for tenants making material misrepresentations on the CDC form.

Friday’s FAQ pronouncement tilts the effect of the moratorium in favor of landlords. Given that the set out in Ohio typically is six-to-eight weeks after the start of the process (the 3-day notice), the real delay in recovering possession of a landlord’s property from a non-paying tenant is now under 30 days.

The scope of the moratorium is limited to situations where the default is solely the non-payment of rent. Our firm has successfully worked with landlords who need to recover possession of their property from hold over tenants, squatters, those causing physical damage to property, those involving illegal use and sale of drugs, too many occupants and other lease violations.

Please call our experienced landlord/tenant litigators if you have questions. Contact Julie Gugino (513.943.5669) for more information.

 

As many in the Ohio real estate, title and finance industries are aware, this firm along with the firm of Markovits, Stock and Demarco are co-counsel to several Plaintiffs challenging a long-running real estate scam that has ensnared hundreds of victims in the greater Cincinnati marketplace.

The Complaint alleges causes of action under Civil RICO, Civil Conspiracy, Breach of Fiduciary Duty by both the various Build Realty companies, First Title and Pat Connors, Negligence against First Title and Pat Connors, Unjust Enrichment, and a declaration that the various schemes designed to avoid the statutory right of redemption and the right of a borrower to excess proceeds under a lending arrangement are illegal, and that the trusts themselves are illegal and contrary to public policy.

The defendants in the proposed Amended Complaint include:

  • Build Realty, Inc.
  • First Title Agency, Inc.
  • Edgar Construction, LLC
  • Cincy Construction, LLC
  • McGregor , First Title, LLC
  • Cowtown Holdings, LLC
  • Build SWO, LLC
  • Greenleaf Support Services, LLC
  • Gary Bailey as Trustee and individually
  • George Triantafilou, as trustee and individually
  • Robert Scott Whiteside
  • G2 Technologies, LLC
  • GT Financial, LLC
  • Five Mile Capital Partners, LLC
  • Smith Graham & Co., Investment Advisors, L.P.
  • Pat Connors

A copy of the proposed form of Amended Complaint is here and below.

It appears this case will soon be moving forward before Federal District Court Judge Cole.

We will endeavor to keep victims updated by means of this blog as developments occur.

If you have questions, it’s best to email Christopher P. Finney. You may also call him at 513-720-2996.

[scribd id=469483280 key=key-GQ52opDHU9TenIB5qdcZ mode=scroll]