OHIO COURT DECISION FINDING RISA PROVISION NOT PREEMPTED VACATED

The U. S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio issued an order vacating its September 30, 2005 decision by Judge Gwin holding that the Ohio Retail Installment Sales Act is not preempted by the National Bank Act. Blanco v. KeyBank USA, N.A., Case No. 04 CV 230 (N.D. Ohio Dec. 28, 2005). The September decision concluded that the National Bank Act does not preempt the RISA provision permitting the plaintiff to assert his breach of contract claims against a national bank holder of a promissory note. Blanco v. KeyBank USA, N.A., Case No. 04 CV 230 (N.D. Ohio Sept. 30, 2005). That decision was contrary to a decision in 2004 by the same court (Judge Gaughan) finding that the National Bank Act and corresponding federal regulations did preempt the Ohio RISA. Abel v. KeyBank USA, N.A., 313 F. Supp. 2d 720 (N.D. Ohio 2004). The Blanco court had acknowledged the Able decision, but stated that the court was not bound by the decision and respectfully disagreed with the Abel court. In the order vacating the September decision, Judge Gwin reused himself from the case citing to an inherited equity interest in the defendant in the case. The case has been reassigned to Judge O’Malley.

Elizabeth Anstaett and Jeff Langer