Background
West Coast Servicing sued Cheryl Persley in August 2024 to enforce a 2003 promissory note and foreclose on property in Columbus. It initially failed to serve Persley at a Foxhall Road address, but later personally served her at the Eastmoor Boulevard property. Persley answered pro se and identified the Eastmoor address as her address.
West Coast later mailed its motion to amend and amended complaint to the unsuccessful Foxhall address, although the amended complaint did not change the claims against Persley. When West Coast moved for summary judgment, Persley objected that she had not been served with the amended complaint and asked for time to answer and respond. The trial court found that Persley had failed to update her address, denied her request, and entered summary judgment and a foreclosure decree.
The Court’s Holding
The Tenth District reversed and remanded. West Coast could serve the amended complaint by mail because the claims against Persley were unchanged, but Civil Rule 5 required mailing to Persley’s last known address. That was the Eastmoor address, established by the original service and Persley’s answer—not the Foxhall address where West Coast already knew service had failed.
The trial court abused its discretion by finding that Persley had changed her address without notice. That clearly erroneous factual finding also improperly supported the denial of Persley’s request for time to answer the amended complaint and respond adequately to summary judgment. The court dismissed Persley’s challenges only insofar as they attacked the default judgment against the Unknown Spouse, because Persley could not appeal on another party’s behalf. It did not reach her limitations defense.
Key Takeaways
- Mailing an amended complaint to an address known to be ineffective is not notice reasonably calculated to reach the defendant.
- A trial court cannot deny a party’s opportunity to respond to summary judgment based on a clearly erroneous finding that the party failed to update an address.
- A pro se litigant may not appeal a judgment entered against another party.
Why It Matters
The decision reinforces that foreclosure plaintiffs must use the defendant’s actual last known address when serving later filings, particularly when prior service attempts at another address failed. Even where an amended complaint does not alter the claims, defective notice can require reversal when it deprives the borrower of a meaningful opportunity to respond before summary judgment.