Background
Xiaowei He executed a 2013 promissory note to Fifth Third Mortgage Company, secured by a mortgage on her Columbus property. Fifth Third filed this foreclosure action in February 2024, alleging that He defaulted. The case later proceeded through substitutions of the plaintiff, with U.S. Bank Trust National Association, as owner trustee for RCAF Acquisition Trust, becoming plaintiff in September 2025.
U.S. Bank moved for summary judgment, submitting the note, mortgage, assignment, payment history, default letter, and a loan-servicer representative’s affidavit. He opposed the motion, asserting that she had a signed and notarized August 2024 loan-modification agreement. Her supporting materials included a timeline, her affidavit, and five pages she described as relevant portions of that agreement.
The Court’s Holding
The Tenth District affirmed the summary judgment and foreclosure decree. U.S. Bank met its initial summary-judgment burden by submitting evidence that it could enforce the note and mortgage, that He was in default, that conditions precedent were met, and of the amount due.
He did not create a genuine factual dispute. Even assuming her materials were admissible, the submitted pages did not contain the modification’s operative terms, show how any modification affected U.S. Bank’s enforcement rights or her payment obligations, or show that she cured the default or performed under a modification. A possible modification agreement, without evidence of its terms and effect, was speculation insufficient to defeat summary judgment.
Key Takeaways
- A foreclosure plaintiff may support summary judgment with loan documents and competent servicer-affidavit evidence of default and the amount due.
- A borrower relying on a loan modification must provide evidence of its actual terms and their effect on the default or amount owed.
- Incomplete signature pages and references to a modification do not, standing alone, create a triable issue of fact.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that a claimed loan modification is not a defense to foreclosure at summary judgment unless the borrower presents competent evidence showing the agreement’s material terms and relevance to enforcement of the note and mortgage.