Legal Opinion · Dissent

Federal Farm Mortgage Corp. v. Claussen

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided July 26, 1940No. 30868Published

1DissentJohnsen, J.

My concern is with the question whether chapter 41, Laws 1933, now section 20-2141, Comp. St. Supp. 1939, can soundly and effectively be made to accomplish the purpose for which it was enacted. That question does not seem to me to have received a sufficiently careful analysis, either in this case or in the cases of Federal Farm Mtg. Corporation v. Cramb, 137 Neb. 553, 290 N. W. 440, and Federal Farm Mtg. Corporation v. Thiele, 137 Neb. 626, 290 N. W. 471, which have preceded it.

The purpose of the legislature in enacting chapter 41, Laws 1933, is unmistakable. It was to prevent mortgage *522debtors…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Johnson v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1908
  2. Equitable Life Insurance Society of United States v. StevensNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
  3. Meehan v. First National BankNebraska Supreme Court · 1895
  4. Pierson v. FaulknerNebraska Supreme Court · 1938
  5. City of Beatrice v. MasslichCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1901

7 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