Legal Opinion

Federal Land Bank v. Warner

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided April 2, 1934No. 498PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Butler

Respondents gave petitioner a mortgage on their farm lands in Arizona to secure a loan of $7,200 made in accordance with the Farm Loan Act. The mortgage provides that in case of suit to foreclose the mortgagors shall pay a reasonable attorney’s fee to be fixed by the court. And that clause is valid under Arizona law. The borrowers having failed to pay according to their promise, petitioner brought this suit to foreclose the mortgage and prayed that an attorney’s fee of $125 be included in the judgment. Respondents objected to the allowance of any amount on account of that item, the trial…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. United States v. Missouri Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
  2. O. S. Stapley Co. v. RogersArizona Supreme Court · 1923
  3. Maxey v. Somerton State BankArizona Supreme Court · 1921
  4. Taylor v. National BankArizona Supreme Court · 1921
  5. McClintock v. BoltonArizona Supreme Court · 1899

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Helvering v. Tex-Penn Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1937
  2. Federal Land Bank of St. Paul v. LillehaugenNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1987
  3. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. FrohmillerArizona Supreme Court · 1951
  4. Globe Indemnity Co. v. BruceCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1935
  5. Elson Development Co. v. Arizona Savings & Loan Ass'nArizona Supreme Court · 1965

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API