Wachovia Natl. Bank of Delaware, N.A. v. Maenle

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[Cite as Wachovia Natl. Bank of Delaware, N.A. v. Maenle, 110 Ohio St.3d 1240, 2006-Ohio3820.] WACHOVIA NATIONAL BANK OF DELAWARE, N.A., F.K.A FIRST UNION NATIONAL BANK OF DELAWARE, APPELLEE, v. MAENLE ET AL., APPELLANTS. [Cite as Wachovia Natl. Bank of Delaware, N.A. v. Maenle, 110 Ohio St.3d 1240, 2006-Ohio-3820.] Appeal dismissed as improvidently accepted. (No. 2005-1635 Submitted June 6, 2006 Decided August 9, 2006.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Huron County, No. H-04-036, 162 Ohio App.3d 479, 2005-Ohio-4021. __________________ {¶ 1} The cause is dismissed, sua sponte, as having been improvidently accepted. {¶ 2} The court orders that the opinion of the court of appeals may not be cited as authority except by the parties inter se. MOYER, C.J., RESNICK, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O CONNOR, O DONNELL and LANZINGER, JJ., concur. PFEIFER, J., dissents. __________________ PFEIFER, J., dissenting. {¶ 3} I would reverse the decision of the court of appeals and reinstate the decision of the trial court. I would base my decision on R.C. 2317.02, which governs privileged communications, not on Hearn v. Rhay (E.D.Wash.1975), 68 F.R.D. 574. I dissent. __________________ McGlinchey Stafford, P.L.L.C., James S. Wertheim, and Kimberly Y. Smith Rivera, for appellee Wachovia National Bank of Delaware, N.A. SUPREME COURT OF OHIO James J. Martin Co., L.P.A., and James J. Martin; and Joseph A Zannieri, for appellants. Russell V. Leffler, Huron County Prosecuting Attorney, and Dina Shenker, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee Huron County Treasurer. K. Ronald Bailey & Associates Co., L.P.A., and K. Ronald Bailey, urging reversal for amicus curiae Ohio Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. Lynch & White and Richard S. Lynch, urging reversal for amicus curiae Richard S. Lynch. Buckingham, Lucal, McGookey & Zeiher Co., L.P.A., and John R. Ball, urging reversal for amicus curiae John R. Ball. ______________________ 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.