Chapter 86

86.010

LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 69 OLR 847 (1990)

86.140

NOTES OF DECISIONS

Possession of promissory note does not constitute ownership of it. Lantz v. Safeco, 93 Or App 664, 763 P2d 744 (1988), Sup Ct review denied

86.155

LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 69 OLR 847 (1990)

86.245

ATTY. GEN. OPINIONS: Real estate loan agreements made by the state, (1976) Vol 37, p 1395

86.705 to 86.795

LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 23 WLR 37, 55 (1987); 67 OLR 306 (1988); 69 OLR 851 (1990)

86.710

NOTES OF DECISIONS

Plaintiff did not irrevocably elect to foreclose when, before decree of foreclosure, it abandoned foreclosure remedy in favor of action on the note. Family Bank of Commerce v. Nelson, 72 Or App 739, 697 P2d 216 (1985), Sup Ct review denied

LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 69 OLR 847 (1990)

86.715

LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 69 OLR 847 (1990)

86.720

NOTES OF DECISIONS

Provision of this section, stating that trustee shall reconvey upon written request of beneficiary, does not allow reconveyance upon presentment of note and trust deed by person with no ownership interest in note or beneficial interest in trust deed and no authority to act on behalf of person who has such interests. Lantz v. Safeco, 93 Or App 664, 763 P2d 744 (1988), Sup Ct review denied

86.735 to 86.755

LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 69 OLR 847 (1990)

86.735

NOTES OF DECISIONS

Where default no longer existed at time property was sold at auction, sale of property was void. Staffordshire Investments, Inc., v. Cal-Western Reconveyance Corp., 209 Or App 528, 149 P3d 150 (2006), Sup Ct review denied

86.765

NOTES OF DECISIONS

Creditor-beneficiary and trustee of trust deed are not authorized unilaterally to declare trustee sale void and commence foreclosure process again because beneficiary bid more than its secured debt; plaintiff, as lienholder, was entitled to excess sale proceeds and trial court erred in granting summary judgment for beneficiary. Bank of Myrtle Point v. Security Bank of Coos County, 67 Or App 512, 678 P2d 772 (1984), Sup Ct review denied

86.770

NOTES OF DECISIONS

Prohibition against further action to collect deficiency following foreclosure sale does not prevent plaintiff from seeking other relief in same action seeking foreclosure. Siuslaw Valley Bank v. Canfield Assoc. Ore. Ltd., 64 Or App 198, 667 P2d 1035 (1983)

Portion of judgment for attorney fees, costs and disbursements that was not satisfied from proceeds of judicial foreclosure and sheriff’s sale is “deficiency judgment” and forbidden by this section. Cottage Grove Apartment Investors v. Brandenfels, 69 Or App 192, 684 P2d 1235 (1984)

Trust deed foreclosed was commercial despite apartment on premises because residence was incidental to storage business and residence exemption was intended to apply to individuals only. Oregon Bank v. Hawkins, 71 Or App 791, 693 P2d 1321 (1984)

Beneficiary under “commercial” trust deed can get deficiency judgment after foreclosing trust deed by judicial proceeding, regardless of whether it is purchase money trust deed. FDIC v. Burdell, 92 Or App 389, 759 P2d 282 (1988), aff’d 307 Or 285, 766 P2d 1032 (1988)

Election of remedy of non-judicial foreclosure occurs only upon sale and because plaintiff abandoned its non-judicial foreclosure proceeding before sale, no election of remedies occurred. Barclaysamerican/Financial Inc. v. Boone, 95 Or App 347, 768 P2d 439 (1989), on reconsideration 96 Or App 635, 773 P2d 1338 (1989)

Trust deed anti-deficiency provision in this section does not initially preclude action being brought on note secured by trust deed. Beckhuson v. Frank, 97 Or App 347, 775 P2d 923 (1989), Sup Ct review denied

When two trust deeds describe same property as security, trust deed beneficiary may foreclose non-judicially on one deed to obtain title to property and then bring action on other note. Urbach v. Monchamp Corp. 110 Or App 275, 821 P2d 1116 (1991), Sup Ct review denied

State anti-deficiency law is not preempted by federal Department of Veterans Affairs regulations so long as state law provides method for secretary of Department to exercise right of indemnity and receive full measure of protection without displacing state law. Connelly v. Derwinski, 961 F2d 129 (1992)

LAW REVIEW CITATIONS: 69 OLR 880 (1990)