Legal Opinion · Dissent

Beaver County Building & Loan Ass'n v. Winowich

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 8, 1936No. Appeal, 117Published

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion by

Mr. Justice Barnes:

I dissent from the opinion of the majority. I would hold valid the legislation here in question. The majority opinion makes it appear that this legislation is an impairment of the obligation of contract in violation of the Federal Constitution, and that it contravenes provisions of the State Constitution. An analysis of the provisions of the Act leads me to the opposite conclusion. The Mortgage Deficiency Judgment Act of January 17, 1934, P. L. 243, here in question, does not impair any substantive contractual rights of the mortgagee. The mortgagor’s…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Home Building & Loan Assn. v. BlaisdellSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
  2. Block v. HirshSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
  3. Norman v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
  4. Marcus Brown Holding Co. v. FeldmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
  5. W. B. Worthen Co. v. ThomasSupreme Court of the United States · 1934

12 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