Andy Engel

Andy has nearly 36 years of experience assisting individuals and small businesses throughout Ohio in a wide range of litigation matters. But Andy is most passionate about safeguarding the rights of homeowners and consumers in mortgage servicing disputes, foreclosure cases, debt collection abuse issues, warranty claims, home improvement disputes, and credit reporting issues.

Andy has argued dozens of appellate cases throughout Ohio and has appeared before the Ohio Supreme Court numerous times arguing for the rights of homeowners and consumers.

Andy has also presented at numerous continuing legal education seminars and the Ohio Judicial College, as well as having taught college-level real estate and business law courses.

Andy graduated from Miami University before obtaining his Juris Doctorate from American University’s Washington College of Law.

• B.S., Business Administration, Miami University
• J.D., American University, Washington College of Law

• Wallace v. Washington Mutual Bank, 683 F.3d 323 (6th Cir. 2012) –  In a first of its kind ruling, the 6th Circuit held that a law firm that falsely asserts that a foreclosing bank is the holder of a promissory note may be held liable under the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
• Harrison v. Montgomery County, Ohio, 997 F.3d 643 (6th Cir. 2021) – Primary brief author in a case in which the circuit court reversed dismissal of a federal takings claim on the basis of res judicata.
• Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp. v. Schwartzwald, 134 Ohio St.3d 13, 2012-Ohio-5017 –  A unanimous decision in which the Supreme Court resolved conflicts among Ohio’s various appellate districts and clearly reaffirmed the long-held principle that a plaintiff’s standing is an absolute requirement to invoke the jurisdiction of a common pleas court. It also held that a party cannot “cure” a lack of standing by gaining an interest in the subject of the litigation after suit is filed.
• Short v. Ohio Dep’t of Job & Family Servs., 2025-Ohio-2604, 271 N.E.3d 351, 358 (10th Dist.) – Successfully argued for reversal of the dismissal of a data breach class action in a first of its kind appellate decision in Ohio.
• Peters v. Akron Gen. Med. Ctr., 2020-Ohio-369 (9th Dist.) – Won reversal of the dismissal of a medical malpractice action based on the application of the discovery rule under Ohio’s statute of repose.
• Kacin v. Ohio Bur. of Motor Vehicles, 2025-Ohio-5815 (10th Dist.) – Successfully argued for reversal of the trial court’s denial of class certification involving a state benefit available for disabled veterans.
• State ex rel. Bowling v. DeWine, 2025-Ohio-2313 (10th Dist.) -Successfully defended a trial court judgment ordering the Governor to rescind the State’s withdrawal from a COVID-era federal unemployment program affecting over 300,000 Ohioans.
• Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v. Thomas, 2025-Ohio-4856 (10th Dist.) – Successfully defended on appeal a trial court judgment dismissing a foreclosure case after trial for failure to prove the amount owed on the mortgage loan.
• FV-1, Inc., as Trustee v. Lackey, 2014-Ohio-4944 (10th Dist.) – The Court of Appeals reversed the grant of summary judgment in a foreclosure case, finding that the trial court committed plain error in granting judgment in a principal amount greater than the original principal amount of the note.
• Third Fed. Savings and Loan Assn. Of Cleveland v. Farno, 2012-Ohio-5245 (12th Dist.) – The Court of Appeals reversed summary judgment concluding that the bank failed to comply with the requirement of Civ. R. 56(E) by not providing copies of documents referred to in the affidavit submitted in support of the motion.
• HSBC Bank USA, N.A., as Indenture Trustee for the Registered Noteholders of Renaissance Home Equity Loan Trust 2007-1 v. Thompson, 2010-Ohio-4158 (2d Dist.) – The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s decision to strike from the record the affidavit submitted by the bank to support its claims. The Court of Appeals also affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of the bank’s foreclosure complaint because the bank failed to establish that it was the holder of the mortgage note.
• Washington Mutual Bank v. Mahaffey, 154 Ohio App.3d 44, 2003-Ohio-4422, (2d Dist.) – Successfully defended consumer in residential foreclosure action due to lender’s failure to comply with FHA servicing requirements.
• Liberty Savings Bank FSB v. Sortman, 2d Dist. Montgomery No. 16532, 98-LW-0866, 1998 Ohio App. LEXIS 1667 (April 7, 1998) – The Court of Appeals reversed a grant of summary judgment to the bank against the loan’s guarantors because the lender renewed the underlying debt without notice and consent of the guarantors.
• National City Bank, Dayton v. Ohio National Life Assurance Corp., 111 Ohio App.3d 387 (1st Dist. 1996) – Represented prevailing bank in case of first impression in the nation under Article 3 of the U.C.C. regarding whether a routing number on an instrument can sufficiently identify a bank as the payee bank on a check.