Background
Rocket Mortgage sued Rodney D. Mullins for breach of a promissory note and sought foreclosure of the mortgage on his home. The clerk attempted residential service through FedEx, while a process server separately attempted personal service. The process server reported that service was unsuccessful.
The FedEx proof-of-delivery form stated that “R. Mullins” had signed for delivery at a residence, but the form docketed before default judgment contained neither the delivery address nor a signature card or electronic image of a signature. A later version filed at the appellate court’s direction included Mullins’ name and address but still lacked a signature. After Mullins failed to answer, the trial court entered default judgment and a foreclosure decree, which he appealed.
The Court’s Holding
The appellate court held that the record did not establish valid service under Ohio Civil Rule 4.1(A)(1)(b), which requires a commercial carrier to return a signed receipt showing to whom the documents were delivered, the delivery date, and the delivery address. Because the FedEx printouts lacked a signed receipt or electronic image of a signature, Rocket Mortgage was not entitled to a presumption that service was proper.
Without valid service, a voluntary appearance, or waiver, the trial court did not acquire personal jurisdiction over Mullins. The default judgment and foreclosure decree therefore were void ab initio. The court vacated the October 29, 2025 judgment and decree and remanded the case for further proceedings.
The court overruled Mullins’ remaining assignments of error concerning the sheriff’s sale, confirmation of the sale, federal loss-mitigation requirements, and opposing counsel’s erroneous report that he had died. Those issues concerned events occurring after the appealed foreclosure decree and were outside the scope of this appeal; the court did not decide how its jurisdictional ruling affected the sale or its confirmation.
Key Takeaways
- A commercial-carrier delivery record does not satisfy Ohio Civil Rule 4.1(A)(1)(b) when it lacks the required signed receipt or electronic image of the recipient’s signature.
- No presumption of proper service arises unless the governing service rules were followed, leaving the plaintiff responsible for establishing actual service.
- An appeal from a foreclosure decree does not automatically place later orders concerning the sheriff’s sale and confirmation before the appellate court.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that a carrier’s notation that someone signed for a shipment is not a substitute for the signed receipt required by Ohio’s service rule. A default foreclosure judgment cannot stand when the record fails to establish service and the defendant neither appeared voluntarily nor waived personal jurisdiction.
It also highlights the importance of separately appealing post-decree foreclosure orders. Although the underlying judgment was vacated and the matter remanded, the appellate court expressly declined to determine the effect of that ruling on the later sheriff’s sale and confirmation.