Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
Brunsoman v. Scarlett
North Dakota Supreme Court
Decided January 16, 1991No. Civ. 900234Published
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partMeschke, Justice
Foreclosure of a real estate mortgage or land contract is constrained by statute. NDCC 32-19-06 and 32-19-07 limit a deficiency judgment to one obtained in an action separate from the foreclosure and sale, and to an amount by which the debt exceeds the fair value of the property as determined by a jury. The history and phrasing of these statutes connote a strong public policy. See First State Bank of Cooperstown v. Ihringer, 217 N.W.2d 857 (N.D.1974). I agree with the majority that these statutes embody a strong public policy.
Most statutory rights can be contractually waived unless that…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- National Bank of Harvey v. International Harvester Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1988
- Blackburn, Nickels & Smith, Inc. v. National Farmers Union Property & Casualty Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1990
- First State Bank of Cooperstown v. IhringerNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1974
- Moses v. Burleigh CountyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1989
- First State Bank of New Rockford v. AndersonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1990
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.