U.S. Great Court
1. A stipulation in a Farm financing home loan that, if there is fit to foreclose, the mortgagor shall spend an acceptable attorney’s cost are fixed by the court, are legitimate within the Federal Farm Loan operate if good within the state law. P. 292 U. S. 54 .
2. the intention of the Farm mortgage operate will be equip growers, by mortgaging their places, to have financial loans at low-cost, and this also factor will be observed in determining understanding an acceptable attorney’s charge in a foreclosures proceeding. P. 292 U. S. 57 .
Certiorari, 290 U.S. 620, to review the affirmance of a decree foreclosing a farm financing mortgage when the trial courtroom have would not implement a stipulation for a legal professional’s fee.
U.S. Great Legal
Government Land Bank of Berkeley v. Warner
CERTIORARI FOR THE GREAT JUDGE OF ARIZONA
1. A stipulation in a Farm financing home loan that, if there is match to foreclose, the mortgagor shall spend an acceptable attorneys’s charge becoming set by the legal, try legitimate in government Farm Loan operate if legitimate under the county legislation. P. 292 U. S. 54 .
2. The purpose of the Farm financing Act will be help farmers, by mortgaging their unique places, to have debts at low-cost, and this also reason is going to be seen in determining what’s a fair lawyer’s charge in a foreclosure proceeding. P. 292 U. S. 57 .
Certiorari, 290 U.S. 620, to examine the affirmance of a decree foreclosing a farm financing home loan when the demo court had refused to implement a stipulation for legal counsel’s cost.
MR. FAIRNESS BUTLER delivered the viewpoint of this Court.
Respondents gave petitioner home financing to their farm countries in Arizona to protected a loan of $7,200 made in conformity together with the Farm financing Act. [Footnote 1] The mortgage supplies that, in case there are match to foreclose, the mortgagors shall spend a reasonable lawyer’s cost are fixed from the court. And therefore clause try valid under Arizona laws. [Footnote 2] The borrowers creating didn’t pay relating to their vow, petitioner lead this fit to foreclose the home loan and prayed that an attorney’s cost of $125 be contained in the wisdom. Participants objected on the allowance of every amount because of that item, the test courtroom suffered their unique contention, plus the supreme judge kept that a portion of the decree upon the ground your collection of these a charge is actually forbidden by the after element of § 31: “No land-bank . . . shall recharge or get any cost, commission, extra, present, or other factor maybe not here specifically licensed.” 12 U.S.C. § 983.
That construction can’t be suffered. The operate determines synergy between consumers on farm mortgages and investors from inside the securities secured by them. The necessity, by means of the mortgage supply, that a mortgagor shall keep the trouble put-upon the financial institution by his standard are reasonable, and also in equilibrium with that idea.
When you look at the absence of a plain expression to that particular results, it may not feel presented that Congress designed to put upon nondefaulting individuals any the main expenses of property foreclosure of mortgage loans produced by other individuals. The Act does not prescribe process for foreclosure, but suggests that condition laws are to govern. Point 30 guides the land-bank commissioner to look at the regulations of each county also to report, on top of other things, whether, inside the opinion, they have been such as to protect against loss in circumstances of default. 12 U.S.Code, § 971. It provides that, if examination shall demonstrate that the regulations of every usually do not manage adequate protection, the Farm Credit Administration may declare https://loansolution.com/payday-loans-ky/ mortgages on area in this county ineligible. Laws, § 972. Together with petition for this writ indicates that, except in a few reports in which regional legislation prohibits such contracts, all the mortgage loans used by the government secure Finance companies consist of stipulations for attorney’s fees for property foreclosure. [Footnote 3] with this it seems that officials charged by-law aided by the government of banks have always construed the Act to permit county laws to regulate. The interest is not labeled as to virtually any situation which that development happens to be questioned. Really eligible to fantastic body weight. U . s . v. Mo. Pac. R. Co., 278 U. S. 269 , 278 U. S. 280 .
