
An Ohio law, known as a mortgage release statute, requires a mortgage lender to record a release of the mortgage within 90 days of the mortgage being paid in full. If the mortgage holder fails to record the release by the deadline, then the statute further states that the borrower under the mortgage and the current owner of the property that had secured the mortgage can recover monetary damages in the amount of $250 from the mortgage holder that violated the statute.
In the case of Voss v. Quicken Loans, L.L.C., et al., 2026-Ohio-531, the Supreme Court of Ohio announced on February 19, 2026, that anyone seeking damages from a mortgage holder for failing to timely record the mortgage release need not prove that they were actually harmed by the failure to record. In other words, it is enough for a plaintiff seeking to enforce the statute to demonstrate the legal injury that the party has suffered, even in the absence of any actual harm caused by the failure to record.
The Supreme Court of Ohio’s holding should act as a warning to lenders in Ohio who take a mortgage interest in real property to secure the loan. Once the loan is paid, the lender must be sure to record the release of the mortgage within 90 days. The mortgage release statute and the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the statutory language create a nearly strict liability standard for the failure to timely record the release.
On a positive note for Ohio lenders, in another part of its decision, the Supreme Court of Ohio held that an amendment to the mortgage release statute that was passed in the wake of the pandemic and which established that a class action lawsuit could not be filed for any violation of the statute that occurred in calendar year 2020, was proper and enforceable.
With more than 40 experienced attorneys and paralegals, Calfee has a significant Litigation bench representing public and private companies in a variety of industries. The team handles diverse matters ranging from complex commercial lawsuits and arbitrations to everyday business disputes. Through judicious staffing and specific legal project management techniques, Calfee attorneys work with clients to develop the most efficient and effective litigation strategy to help meet clients' unique objectives. Since 2005, Calfee has been recognized as a Leading Law Firm for Litigation: General Commercial by Chambers USA, most recently in Band 2 in Ohio (2025).
Calfee, Halter & Griswold LLP is a full-service corporate law firm with 160 attorneys and professionals in Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati, and Indianapolis. Calfee serves clients in the Midwest, nationally and globally in the areas of Corporate and Finance, Employee Benefits and Executive Compensation, Energy and Utilities, Estate and Succession Planning and Administration, Government Relations and Legislation, Intellectual Property, Investment Management Law, Labor and Employment, Litigation, and Real Estate Law. Calfee has been recognized as a leading law firm by Chambers USA 2025 in Antitrust, Banking & Finance, Construction, Corporate/M&A, Employee Benefits & Executive Compensation, Energy & Natural Resources, Environment, Government Relations, Insurance, Intellectual Property, Investment Funds: Regulatory & Compliance, Labor & Employment, Litigation: General Commercial, Litigation: White-Collar Crime & Government Investigations, and Real Estate, and by Chambers HNW 2025 in Private Wealth Law. A founding member of Lex Mundi, Calfee offers international representation through a network of independent law firms with access to 22,000 attorneys located in more than 125 countries. Additional information is available at Calfee.com.
Calfee Connections blogs, vlogs, and other educational content are intended to inform and educate readers about legal developments and are not intended as legal advice for any specific individual or specific situation. Please consult with your attorney regarding any legal questions you may have. With regard to all content including case studies or descriptions, past outcomes do not predict future results. The opinions expressed may not necessarily reflect the viewpoints of all attorneys and professionals of Calfee, Halter & Griswold LLP. Updates related to all government assistance/incentive programs are provided with the most current information made available to Calfee at the time of publication. Clarifications and further guidance may be disseminated by government authorities on an ongoing basis. All information should be reaffirmed prior to the submission of any application and/or program participation.
Subscribe
Recent Posts
- Rolling Over Without Getting “Rolled” – Points to Consider in Connection with Rollover Equity
- Supreme Court of Ohio Concludes that Mortgage Borrowers Do Not Need to Suffer Actual Harm to Recover Monetary Damages if Lender Fails to Timely Record Mortgage Release
- AI Considerations for Corporate Legal Departments Video Series (Part Seven): How Can Companies Leverage These Emerging Technologies to Improve Legal Operations?
- AI Considerations for Corporate Legal Departments Video Series (Part Six): What Are Companies Doing to Adjust for the Regulatory Landscape in the AI space?
- AI Considerations for Corporate Legal Departments Video Series (Part Five): How Can In-House Legal Counsel Partner With Their Business Units to Support Innovation While Still Addressing Compliance, Ethics and Other Concerns?
- AI Considerations for Corporate Legal Departments Video Series (Part Four): How Are Corporate Legal Departments Balancing Customer Demand and Risk Considerations Related to AI-Enhanced Technologies?
- AI Considerations for Corporate Legal Departments Video Series (Part Three): What Are the Corporate Legal Department Considerations for Policies Related to Implementing Generative AI?
- AI Considerations for Corporate Legal Departments Video Series (Part Two): What Are The In-House Legal Department Considerations in Branding Their Company's AI?
- AI Considerations for Corporate Legal Departments Video Series (Part One): How Are Companies Interacting With Emerging Technologies Like AI?
- Ohio Supreme Court Refuses To Weigh In – For Now – On Liability Of Hackers Under Ohio Law
Archives
- March 2026
- February 2026
- October 2025
- September 2025
- August 2025
- July 2025
- June 2025
- November 2024
- October 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- November 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- November 2021
- October 2021
- July 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020