Which Lawyers Win Before Your Judge?

About 41,000 new cases are filed in U.S. courts every weekday. Behind each one is a person trying to understand what happens next. Here’s what the public record can tell you about this matter — and about the people deciding it.

  • Know Your Judge

    Every judge has a pattern — what they grant, what they deny, how they handle the kinds of motions your case will see.

  • Know The Lawyers

    See an attorney’s actual track record — case types, courts, and how they’ve performed in front of this judge before.

  • Know Your Court

    Every courthouse has its own rhythm — filing-to-resolution times, common dispositions, how often cases like yours settle.

Is this judge more likely to rule for the plaintiff or the defendant in cases of this type?

How has your attorney actually performed in front of this judge?

AICasePredict surfaces patterns from public court records. We don’t predict outcomes.

Full Analytics Report

  • Complete case narrative
  • Judge details and rulings
  • Case disposition and outcome
  • All docket entries
  • Related cases and filings
$20
One-time purchase
Photo of Cuyahoga County

Court

Cuyahoga County

Ohio

View Court Profile

Case Information

Filed 2024-01-03
Status INACTIVE
Type Foreclosure Marsh. Of Lien
Docket 79 entries

Parties

Plaintiff Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, As Trustee For Argent Securities Inc., Asset Backed Pass Through Certificates, Series 2005 W 3
Defendant Grace L Flachbart|Frank J Fachbart|State Of Ohio, Department Of Taxation
Photo of Hon. JOHN D SUTULA

Judge

Hon. JOHN D SUTULA

Cuyahoga County (OH)

Ohio

View Judge Profile

Lawyers

Docket Entries

  1. ON 01/08/2024 I SERVED THE WITHIN NAMED FLACHBART/GRACE/L BY SERVING A TRUE AND CERTIFIED COPY THEREOF WITH ALL THE ENDORSEMENTS THEREON. S.P.S.
  2. ON 01/08/2024 I SERVED THE WITHIN NAMED FACHBART/FRANK/J BY SERVING A TRUE AND CERTIFIED COPY THEREOF WITH ALL THE ENDORSEMENTS THEREON. S.P.S.
  3. AFFIDAVIT FILED BY P1 DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, AS TRUSTEE FOR ARGENT SECURITIES ATTORNEY JUSTIN M. RITCH 0085358 AFFIDAVIT OF JUSTIN M. RITCH
  4. ANSWER FILED BY D3 STATE OF OHIO, DEPARTMENT OF TAXATION ATTORNEY MELANIE CORNELIUS 0029808 THE STATE OF OHIO DEPARTMENT OF TAXATION
  5. USPS RECEIPT NO. 52719961 DELIVERED BY USPS 01/09/2024 STATE OF OHIO, DEPARTMENT OF TAXATION PROCESSED BY COC 01/17/2024.
  6. USPS RECEIPT NO. 52719960 DELIVERED BY USPS 01/10/2024 FACHBART/FRANK/J PROCESSED BY COC 01/17/2024.
  7. USPS RECEIPT NO. 52719959 DELIVERED BY USPS 01/10/2024 FLACHBART/GRACE/L PROCESSED BY COC 01/17/2024.
  8. USPS RECEIPT NO. 52715891 DELIVERED BY USPS 01/10/2024 FACHBART/FRANK/J PROCESSED BY COC 01/17/2024.
  9. USPS RECEIPT NO. 52715890 DELIVERED BY USPS 01/10/2024 FLACHBART/GRACE/L PROCESSED BY COC 01/17/2024.
  10. USPS RECEIPT NO. 52715892 DELIVERED BY USPS 01/09/2024 STATE OF OHIO, DEPARTMENT OF TAXATION PROCESSED BY COC 01/17/2024.
  11. NOTICE FILED BY P1 DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, AS TRUSTEE FOR ARGENT SECURITIES ATTORNEY JUSTIN M. RITCH 0085358 NOTICE OF FILING AN AMENDED PRELIMINARY JUDICIAL REPORT
  12. NOTICE OF SUMMONS SERVICE RETURN FILED SERVICE RETURN
  13. NOTICE OF SUMMONS SERVICE RETURN FILED SERVICE RETURN
  14. SUMS COMPLAINT(52719961) SENT BY CERTIFIED MAIL. TO: STATE OF OHIO, DEPARTMENT OF TAXATION C/O OHIO ATTORNEY GENERAL 150 EAST GAY STREET 21ST FLOOR COLUMBUS, OH 43215
  15. SUMS COMPLAINT(52719960) SENT BY CERTIFIED MAIL. TO: FRANK J FACHBART 4380 WEST 155TH STREET CLEVELAND, OH 44135
  16. SUMS COMPLAINT(52719959) SENT BY CERTIFIED MAIL. TO: GRACE L FLACHBART 4380 WEST 155TH STREET CLEVELAND, OH 44135
  17. SUMS COMPLAINT(52715892) SENT BY CERTIFIED MAIL. TO: STATE OF OHIO, DEPARTMENT OF TAXATION C/O OHIO ATTORNEY GENERAL 150 EAST GAY STREET 21ST FLOOR COLUMBUS, OH 43215
  18. SUMS COMPLAINT(52715891) SENT BY CERTIFIED MAIL. TO: FRANK J FACHBART 4380 WEST 155TH STREET CLEVELAND, OH 44135
  19. SUMS COMPLAINT(52715890) SENT BY CERTIFIED MAIL. TO: GRACE L FLACHBART 4380 WEST 155TH STREET CLEVELAND, OH 44135
  20. MAGISTRATE BRIAN S GOZELANCZYK ASSIGNED (MANUALLY)
  21. ALL NON-MILITARY CLIENT AFFIDAVITS FILED IN RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE CASES MUST INDICATE THAT THE AFFIANT HAS ACTUAL PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OF THE FILE AND LOAN HISTORY IN QUESTION AND HAS PERSONALLY REVIEWED THE DOCUMENTS, RECORDS, OR OTHER DATA RELIED UPON TO MAKE THE STATEMENTS CONTAINED IN THE AFFIDAVIT. ALL CLIENT EXECUTED MILITARY AFFIDAVITS FILED IN RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE CASES MUST INDICATE THAT THE AFFIANT HAS ACTUAL PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OF THE APPROPRIATE DEFENDANTS' MILITARY STATUS. FAILURE TO PROVIDE APPROPRIATE AFFIDAVITS MAY RESULT IN MANDATORY PERSONAL ATTENDANCE OF AN AFFIANT FOR A HEARING, THE IMPOSITION OF SANCTIONS AND PENALTIES FOR PERJURY OR CONTEMPT, AND DISMISSAL OF THE CASE. BEFORE JUDGMENT IS ENTERED ON ANY CLAIM FOR FORECLOSURE AND/OR MONEY JUDGMENT IN A RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE CASE, COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF AND ANY OTHER PARTY THAT ASSERTS A CLAIM FOR FORECLOSURE OR MONEY JUDGMENT MUST FILE AN AFFIDAVIT OR AFFIDAVITS. IN REGARD TO NON-MILITARY CLIENT AFFIDAVITS, THIS AFFIDAVIT MUST: 1) IDENTIFY THE COUNSEL OF RECORD AND HIS OR HER LAW FIRM. 2) PROVIDE THAT THE COUNSEL OF RECORD HAS REVIEWED THE FILE. 3) PROVIDE THAT THE COUNSEL OF RECORD HAS COMMUNICATED WITH A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PARTY SEEKING FORECLOSURE AND/OR MONEY JUDGMENT OR ITS SERVICER AND THAT THIS REPRESENTATIVE: HAS AFFIRMED THAT HE OR SHE HAS PERSONALLY REVIEWED THE DOCUMENTS, RECORDS, OR OTHER DATA RELATED TO THE CASE; HAS REVIEWED THE PLEADINGS AND OTHER COURT FILINGS IN THE CASE; AND HAS CONFIRMED BOTH THE FACTUAL ACCURACY OF THE PLEADINGS AND COURT FILINGS AND THE ACCURACY OF THE NOTARIZATIONS CONTAINED THEREIN. 4) PROVIDE THE FULL NAME OF THE REPRESENTATIVE DESCRIBED IN ITEM 3 AND THE DATE OR DATES OF THE COMMUNICATION. 5) CERTIFY THAT, TO THE BEST OF THE COUNSEL OF RECORD'S KNOWLEDGE, THE PLEADINGS AND OTHER COURT FILINGS IN SUPPORT OF THE CLAIMS FOR FORECLOSURE ARE COMPLETE AND ACCURATE IN ALL RELEVANT RESPECTS. 6) ACKNOWLEDGE THAT COUNSEL OF RECORD HAS A CONTINUING OBLIGATION TO AMEND AND SUPPLEMENT THE AFFIDAVIT IN LIGHT OF NEWLY DISCOVERED FACTS FOLLOWING ITS FILING. 7) BE SIGNED AND DATED BY COUNSEL OF RECORD. IN REGARD TO CLIENT EXECUTED MILITARY AFFIDAVITS, THIS AFFIDAVIT MUST: 1) IDENTIFY THE COUNSEL OF RECORD AND HIS OR HER LAW FIRM. 2) PROVIDE THAT THE COUNSEL OF RECORD HAS COMMUNICATED WITH THE AFFIANT OF THE MILITARY AFFIDAVIT AND THAT THE AFFIANT HAS AFFIRMED THAT HE OR SHE HAS PERSONALLY REVIEWED NECESSARY WEBSITE AND/OR DATABASE TO DETERMINE THE MILITARY STATUS OF THE APPROPRIATE DEFENDANTS. 3) PROVIDE THE FULL NAME OF THE AFFIANT DESCRIBED IN ITEM 2 AND THE DATE OR DATES OF THE COMMUNICATION. 4) CERTIFY THAT, TO THE BEST OF THE COUNSEL OF RECORD'S KNOWLEDGE, THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE MILITARY AFFIDAVIT IS ACCURATE IN ALL RELEVANT RESPECTS. 5) ACKNOWLEDGE THAT COUNSEL OF RECORD HAS A CONTINUING OBLIGATION TO AMEND AND SUPPLEMENT THE AFFIDAVIT IN LIGHT OF NEWLY DISCOVERED FACTS FOLLOWING ITS FILING. 6) BE SIGNED AND DATED BY COUNSEL OF RECORD. FAILURE TO SUBMIT AN APPROPRIATE AFFIDAVIT ON OR BEFORE THE DATE OF TRIAL, THE DATE THAT A MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS RIPE FOR RULING, OR THE DATE OF DEFAULT HEARING, WHICHEVER IS APPLICABLE, WILL RESULT IN DISMISSAL OF THE CASE AND MAY RESULT IN FURTHER SANCTIONS. STANDARDIZED AFFIDAVIT FORMS ARE POSTED ON THE CUYAHOGA COUNTY COURT OF COMMONPLEAS WEBSITE HTTP://CP.CUYAHOGACOUNTY.US/INTERNET/COURTDOCS/MAGISTRATES/AFFIDAVIT (REV5).PDF. ALL AFFIDAVITS SUBMITTED PURSUANT TO THIS ORDER MUST BE IN THE FORMAT OF THESE STANDARDIZED AFFIDAVIT FORMS. IN LIEU OF THIS AFFIDAVIT: 1) IN CASES WHERE CLIENT AFFIDAVITS HAVE BEEN FILED, THE AFFIANT OR AFFIANTS MUST APPEAR AT THE HEARING OF THE MATTER AND TESTIFY REGARDING THOSE AFFIDAVITS. THE REPRESENTATIVE MUST APPEAR IN PERSON AND TELEPHONIC APPEARANCE WILL NOT BE PERMITTED. IF MULTIPLE CLIENT AFFIDAVITS ARE FILED IN THE CASE AND ARE EXECUTED BY MORE THAN ONE AFFIANT, EACH AFFIANT MUST APPEAR AT THE HEARING OF THE MATTER. 2) IN CASES WHERE NO CLIENT AFFIDAVITS HAVE BEEN FILED, AN OFFICER OF THE PARTY SEEKING FORECLOSURE OR AN OFFICER OF ITS SERVICER MUST APPEAR AT THE HEARING OF THE MATTER AND TESTIFY IN SUPPORT OF THE ALLEGATIONS OF THE COMPLAINT AND CONTENTS OF OTHER DOCUMENTS OR COURT FILINGS. THE OFFICER MUST APPEAR IN PERSON AND TELEPHONIC APPEARANCE WILL NOT BE PERMITTED. 3) IN CASES WHERE NO HEARING IS SCHEDULED BEFORE THE ENTRY OF JUDGMENT (SUCH AS SOME SUMMARY JUDGMENT CASES), THE OFFICER OF THE PARTY SEEKING FORECLOSURE MUST, CONTEMPORANEOUSLY WITH THE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, MOVE TO SCHEDULE A HEARING AT WHICH THE AFFIANT MAY APPEAR. 4) WITH THE EXCEPTION OF AFFIANTS OF MILITARY AFFIDAVITS, THE AFFIANT OR AN OFFICER OF THE PARTY SEEKING FORECLOSURE OR OFFICER OF ITS SERVICER WHO APPEARS IN COURT IN LIEU OF THE FILING OF A FORECLOSURE COUNSEL AFFIDAVIT MUST APPEAR WITH THE ORIGINAL PROMISSORY NOTE, INCLUDING ALL ENDORSEMENTS AND ALLONGES AND A CURRENT PAYMENT HISTORY FOR THE MORTGAGE LOAN AT ISSUE. THE AFFIANT OR AN OFFICER OF THE PARTY SEEKING FORECLOSURE OR OFFICER OF ITS SERVICER MUST BE PREPARED TO TESTIFY THAT HE OR SHE HAS PERSONALLY REVIEWED THE DOCUMENTS, RECORDS OR OTHER DATA RELATED TO THE CASE, HAS REVIEWED THE PLEADINGS AND OTHER COURT FILINGS IN THE CASE AND HAS CONFIRMED BOTH THE FACTUAL ACCURACY OF THE FILINGS AND THE ACCURACY OF THE NOTARIZATIONS CONTAINED THEREIN, IF ANY. THE AFFIANT OR AN OFFICER OF THE PARTY SEEKING FORECLOSURE OR OFFICER OF ITS SERVICER MUST BE PREPARED TO RESPOND TO THE QUESTIONING OF THE MAGISTRATE OR JUDGE PRESIDING OVER THE HEARING AND THE QUESTIONING OF ANY OTHER PARTY ATTENDING THE HEARING. 5) IF THE AFFIANT OR OFFICER OF THE PARTY SEEKING FORECLOSURE OR AN OFFICER OF ITS SERVICER HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY DEPOSED AND HAS TESTIFIED UNDER OATH REGARDING THE ABOVE REQUIRED INFORMATION, THE FILING OF THE TRANSCRIPT OF THAT DEPOSITION WILL SATISFY THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS POLICY. FAILURE TO FILE AN ATTORNEY AFFIDAVIT OR DO ANY OF THE ALTERNATIVES TO FILING AN ATTORNEY AFFIDAVIT BEFORE THE CASE IS RIPE FOR THE ENTRY OF JUDGMENT WILL RESULT IN DISMISSAL OF THE CASE. NOTICE ISSUED
  22. IT IS ORDERED BY THE COURT THAT THIS CAUSE BE REFERRED TO THE COURT MAGISTRATE TO TRY THE ISSUES OF LAW AND FACT ARISING THEREIN AND REPORT WITHOUT UNNECESSARY DELAY. A PARTY SEEKING A DEFAULT JUDGMENT MUST FILE A MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT. ONCE A CASE IS SET FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT, THE MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT MAY BE WITHDRAWN ONLY BY SEPARATE MOTION WITH GOOD CAUSE SHOWN. NOTICE ISSUED
  23. SUMS COMPLAINT(52725535) SENT BY SPECIAL PROCESS SERVER. TO: FRANK J FACHBART 4380 WEST 155TH STREET CLEVELAND, OH 44135
  24. SUMS COMPLAINT(52725534) SENT BY SPECIAL PROCESS SERVER. TO: GRACE L FLACHBART 4380 WEST 155TH STREET CLEVELAND, OH 44135
  25. SUMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  26. SUMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  27. WRIT FEE
  28. WRIT FEE
  29. SUMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  30. SUMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  31. WRIT FEE
  32. WRIT FEE
  33. WRIT FEE
  34. SUMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  35. REQUEST FOR SERVICE FILED PRAECIPE FOR SERVICE
  36. REQUEST FOR SERVICE FILED PRAECIPE FOR SERVICE
  37. SUMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  38. SUMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  39. SUMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  40. WRIT FEE
  41. WRIT FEE
  42. WRIT FEE
  43. JUDGE JOHN D SUTULA ASSIGNED (RANDOM)
  44. SPECIAL PROJECTS FUND FEE
  45. LEGAL RESEARCH
  46. LEGAL NEWS
  47. LEGAL AID
  48. COMPUTER FEE
  49. CLERK'S FEE
  50. DEPOSIT AMOUNT PAID JUSTIN M. RITCH
  51. DEPOSIT AMOUNT PAID JUSTIN M. RITCH
  52. UMS COMPLAINT(52725534) SENT BY SPECIAL PROCESS SERVER. TO: GRACE L FLACHBART 4380 WEST 155TH STREET CLEVELAND, OH 44135
  53. UMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  54. UMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  55. RIT FEE
  56. RIT FEE
  57. UMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  58. UMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  59. RIT FEE
  60. RIT FEE
  61. RIT FEE
  62. UMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  63. EQUEST FOR SERVICE FILED PRAECIPE FOR SERVICE
  64. EQUEST FOR SERVICE FILED PRAECIPE FOR SERVICE
  65. UMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  66. UMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  67. UMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  68. RIT FEE
  69. RIT FEE
  70. RIT FEE
  71. UDGE JOHN D SUTULA ASSIGNED (RANDOM)
  72. PECIAL PROJECTS FUND FEE
  73. EGAL RESEARCH
  74. EGAL NEWS
  75. EGAL AID
  76. OMPUTER FEE
  77. LERK'S FEE
  78. EPOSIT AMOUNT PAID JUSTIN M. RITCH
  79. EPOSIT AMOUNT PAID JUSTIN M. RITCH

See the patterns behind this case

The free view above tells you who’s in the room. The detailed reports below show how the room tends to behave — using the same public records lawyers quietly rely on before every hearing.

  • Judge Report

    How this judge has ruled in cases like yours — case mix, motion outcomes, and historical docket. Judges set the floor of what’s possible in your courtroom.

  • Attorney vs Judge Report

    Everything in the Judge Report, plus how your attorney has actually performed in front of this judge. Attorneys move you off the floor — or don’t.

One-time payment, no subscription. Reports describe past public court activity — they don’t predict outcomes and they aren’t legal advice.

Get Free Case Details

Enter your email to receive case information including parties, docket entries, and status updates.

By submitting you agree to our Privacy Policy.

Need this case removed? Enter your email above — the confirmation email includes a case removal link.

Full Analytics Report

  • Complete case narrative
  • Judge details and rulings
  • Case disposition and outcome
  • All docket entries
  • Related cases and filings
$20
One-time purchase

Legal Analytics Has Been Featured In

Featured in Forbes, Bloomberg, The New Yorker, Above The Law, American Bar Association, and more