Legal Opinion

Framingham Savings Bank v. Turk

Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division

Decided October 25, 1994PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtCoven, J.

This is the defendants’ appeal of a judgment for the plaintiff-mortgagee in two actions, which were consolidated for trial, to recover deficiencies on two mortgage notes following the foreclosure sale of the mortgaged properties.

The sole issue presented by the defendants’ appeal is whether a mortgagee may maintain a deficiency action despite its failure to send the statutory form of notice prescribed by G.L.C. 244, §17B where the defendant-mortgagors had actual notice of the mortgagee’s intention to pursue a deficiency.

The case was submitted to the trial court on the parties’ Agreed Statement…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Seronick v. LEVY SCHONFELDMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1988
  2. Guempel v. Great American InsuranceMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1981
  3. Palumbo v. AudetteMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1949
  4. Wild v. ConstantiniMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1993
  5. Wornat Development Corp. v. VakalisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1988

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. LPPAS Representative, LLC v. ATH Holding Company, LLC / Shareholder Representative Services LLC v. ATH Holding Company, LLCCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 2020

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

Powered by the Exa API