University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Hood v. Midwest Savings Bank FH-OH-0007
Docket / Court 2:97-cv-00218-JDH-MRA ( S.D. Ohio )
State/Territory Ohio
Case Type(s) Fair Housing/Lending/Insurance
Case Summary
Plaintiff, an African-American, applied for a construction loan from Defendant-lender. Defendant denied the loan, purportedly because of Defendant's credit history. Plaintiff reapplied for a loan from Defendant and received it. Plaintiff subsequently filed suit on February 21, 1997, in the U.S. ... read more >
Plaintiff, an African-American, applied for a construction loan from Defendant-lender. Defendant denied the loan, purportedly because of Defendant's credit history. Plaintiff reapplied for a loan from Defendant and received it. Plaintiff subsequently filed suit on February 21, 1997, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, alleging that the Defendant's first rejection of the loan application was premised on redlining prohibited by the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601-3619, and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1691. The District Court granted in part the Defendant's motion for summary judgment, finding that the Plaintiff had failed to produce evidence that the Defendant approved loan applications filed by similarly situated white borrowers. However, the District Court denied the Defendant's motion to dismiss an ECOA-based count alleging that the Defendant had failed to provide the Plaintiff with proper notice concerning the reasons why the first loan was rejected. The Sixth Circuit affirmed the District Court's partial grant of summary judgment on April 4, 2004. Hood v. Midwest Sav. Bank, 95 Fed. Appx. 768 (6th Cir. 2004).

Plaintiff refilled his Complaint on June 7, 2004, alleging violations of the ECOA and Ohio Revised Code § 4112.021, based on Defendant's failure to provide Plaintiff with required information when rejecting his first loan application. U.S. District Court Judge John D. Holschuh denied the Defendant's motion for summary judgment with respect to the ECOA claim on December 16, 2005, finding that a reasonable jury could conclude that Plaintiff had suffered emotional injuries as a result of Defendant-bank's failure to comply with the notification provisions of the ECOA. Judge Holschuh granted the Plaintiff's motion to dismiss the state law claim, however, finding that it was barred by claim preclusion since the Plaintiff had not included it in his original Complaint.

On April 20, 2006, the District Court dismissed the ECOA claim with the consent of both parties.

We have no further information about this case.

Andrew Nash - 06/02/2008


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Discrimination-area
Lending
Discrimination-basis
Race discrimination
General
Funding
Plaintiff Type
Private Plaintiff
Race
Black
Causes of Action Fair Housing Act/Fair Housing Amendments Act (FHAA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601 et seq.
Defendant(s) Midwest Savings Bank
Plaintiff Description African-American man who alleged that his loan application was denied because of "redlining," the practice of refusing loans because the home is located in a poor, inner-city (and therefore "high risk") area.
Indexed Lawyer Organizations None on record
Class action status sought None on record
Class action status granted No
Prevailing Party Mixed
Public Int. Lawyer No
Nature of Relief Unknown
Source of Relief Unknown
Form of Settlement None on record
Order Duration not on record
Case Closing Year 2006
Case Ongoing No
Docket(s)
02-3525 (U.S. Court of Appeals) 06/30/2004
FH-OH-0007-9002.pdf | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
2:04-cv-00481-JDH-MRA (S.D. Ohio) 04/20/2006
FH-OH-0007-9001.pdf | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
2:97-cv-00218-JDH-MRA (S.D. Ohio) 05/09/2007
FH-OH-0007-9000.pdf | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
[Opinion] 04/08/2004 (95 Fed.Appx. 768)
FH-OH-0007-0004.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Complaint [Refiling of Previously Dismissed Claim] 06/07/2004
FH-OH-0007-0001.pdf | Detail
Memorandum Opinion & Order [Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendant's Motion for S/J on the Refiled Complaint] 12/16/2005 (S.D. Ohio)
FH-OH-0007-0002.pdf | Detail
Stipulated Dismissal Entry [of Second, Refiled Claim] 04/20/2006
FH-OH-0007-0003.pdf | Detail
Judges Abel, Mark R. (S.D. Ohio) [Magistrate]
FH-OH-0007-9000 | FH-OH-0007-9001
Aldrich, Ann (N.D. Ohio)
FH-OH-0007-0004
Gibbons, Julia Smith (W.D. Tenn., Sixth Circuit)
FH-OH-0007-0004
Holschuh, John David (S.D. Ohio)
FH-OH-0007-0002 | FH-OH-0007-9000 | FH-OH-0007-9001
Kennedy, Cornelia Groefsema (E.D. Mich., Sixth Circuit)
FH-OH-0007-0004
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers Henderson, Thomas Lee (Ohio)
FH-OH-0007-9000
Spater, Alexander Morris (Ohio)
FH-OH-0007-0001 | FH-OH-0007-0003 | FH-OH-0007-0004 | FH-OH-0007-9000 | FH-OH-0007-9001 | FH-OH-0007-9002
Defendant's Lawyers Albert, John Curtis (Ohio)
FH-OH-0007-9000
Willard, Robert Harrod (Ohio)
FH-OH-0007-9000
Wilson, James Allison Jr. (Ohio)
FH-OH-0007-0003 | FH-OH-0007-0004 | FH-OH-0007-9000 | FH-OH-0007-9001 | FH-OH-0007-9002
Other Lawyers None on record

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -