Opinion

Magnolia Lumber Corp. v. Lithia Lumber Co.

  • 241 Or. 65
  • 404 P.2d 190
  • 1965 Ore. LEXIS 365
Court
Oregon Supreme Court
Filed
Jul 15, 1965
Status
Published
Author
Goodwin
On the bench
Connell, Denecke, Goodwin, Holman, McAllister, Perry, Sloan
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

GOODWIN, J.,

dissenting.

It must be remembered that the mortgagee had the option, in preparing the mortgage, to place all the desired security under a single mortgage, or to place the personal property under a chattel mortgage and the land under a real-property mortgage. It would appear that both orderly procedure and certainty in the law would best be served by treating the mortgage as a purchase-money mortgage upon land. A mortgagee need not mingle land and personal property in a single mortgage. If he does so, the matter of a deficiency ought to be governed by the rules of law applying to the foreclosure of mortgages on land. These rules are well settled, and are calculated to serve the legitimate ends of both parties fairly and fully. The segregation of the two classes of security after foreclosure in order to apply to each class a separate deficiency remedy will be a difficult, expensive, and wasteful task. The difficulty in which the trial court is placed by the majority opinion could have been avoided by using two mortgages. I would hold the mortgagee to his election and treat the whole transaction as one within ORS 88.070.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.