Background
Sup Soggy Doggy, LLC executed a $500,000 term note payable to Wright-Patt Credit Union, Inc. and secured the debt with a mortgage on property in Zanesville, Ohio. Steven R. Simmons separately guaranteed the company’s obligations. The credit union alleged that the company stopped making required monthly payments in October 2024, accelerated the debt, and sued for money damages and foreclosure.
After Sup Soggy Doggy and Simmons answered the complaint, the credit union moved for summary judgment. The defendants filed a motion under Ohio Civil Rule 56(F) asking the trial court to hold the summary-judgment motion and a motion for judgment on the pleadings in abeyance. The credit union filed its opposition on March 3, 2026, and the trial court granted summary judgment and entered a foreclosure decree the next day.
The Court’s Holding
The Fifth District held that the trial court committed reversible error by granting summary judgment before the defendants’ time to file a reply supporting their Rule 56(F) motion had expired. Under Civil Rule 6(C)(1), a movant may serve a reply within seven days after service of the response to a written motion.
Because the trial court ruled only one day after the credit union filed its opposition, it decided the matter before the Rule 56(F) motion was deemed submitted. The appellate court concluded that the premature ruling implicated the defendants’ procedural due-process rights, sustained their first two assignments of error, reversed the judgment, and remanded for the trial court to allow them an opportunity to reply.
The court deemed premature the defendants’ third assignment of error, which challenged entry of summary judgment while allegedly necessary parties had not appeared.
Key Takeaways
- A trial court must allow the reply period prescribed by Civil Rule 6 to expire before treating a written motion as submitted.
- Granting summary judgment before the movants could timely reply in support of their Rule 56(F) motion constituted reversible error.
- The appellate court did not decide the merits of the foreclosure dispute or the necessary-parties issue.
Why It Matters
The decision emphasizes that motion-practice deadlines are tied to the fundamental right to be heard. Even when a summary-judgment motion is otherwise ready for consideration, a court risks reversal if it rules while an authorized reply period remains open.
On remand, Sup Soggy Doggy and Simmons must be permitted to file a reply concerning their Rule 56(F) request before the trial court proceeds consistently with the appellate opinion.