Pierson v. American Nat. Bank of Shawnee
| Decision Date | 06 May 1958 |
| Docket Number | No. 37934,37934 |
| Citation | 325 P.2d 426 |
| Parties | O. E. PIERSON and Isabel Pierson, Plaintiff in Error, v. AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK OF SHAWNEE, Oklahoma, Defendant in Error. |
| Court | Oklahoma Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
1. An action may be maintained to foreclose a mortgage on real property without seeking a personal judgment for the mortgage indebtedness; and the rendition of judgment foreclosing a mortgage executed by defendants on property to which they now disclaim any interest and exempting them from personal liability for the debt, is not reversible error.
2. The statute authorizing the allowance of attorney's fees in an action to enforce a lien, 42 O.S.1951 § 176, does not authorize the allowance of a fee to a defendant who disclaims any interest in the property on which a lien is sought to be enforced and against whom judgment is entered in rem foreclosing the lien on the property.
3. As a general rule, attorney's fees are not recoverable in the absence of statute or specific contractual authority.
Appeal from the District Court of Lincoln County; Donald E. Powers, Judge.
Action on promissory notes and to foreclose the mortgage security. Judgment for plaintiff foreclosing mortgage, the mortgagor defendants appeal. Affirmed.
P. D. Erwin, Chandler, for plaintiff in error.
Spurr & Steed, Shawnee, for defendant in error.
This is an appeal on the original record by plaintiffs in error from a judgment foreclosing a mortgage executed by them on certain real property of which they are the record owners. Further reference to the parties will be by their trial court designation.
The plaintiff, American National Bank of Shawnee, instituted this action against these defendants, O. E. Pierson and Isabel Pierson, and others not parties to this appeal, to recover judgment on certain promissory notes and to foreclose the real estate mortgage security for the notes. The substance of defendants' answer to the petition was that they were not liable for the debt evidenced by the notes and mortgages since they had signed the instruments to accommodate the plaintiff and the real debtor. Their answer alleged that they had never had the deed to the property covered by the mortgage; that they permitted title to the property to be conveyed to them of record as an accommodation to plaintiff and the actual debtor; that they had never been in possession or control of the premises; that they had never collected any of the rents; that they were not liable. Although the answer also contained a general denial, it appears that the allegations of the pleading admit the execution of the notes and mortgage by the defendants.
After plaintiff filed a reply controverting the allegations of the answer, it subsequently filed a waiver of its right to a personal judgment against these defendants and moved for judgment on the pleadings foreclosing the mortgage on the theory that the defendants' answer constituted a disclaimer as to the property involved. The trial court construed the answer to be a disclaimer of any interest in the property and entered judgment against defendants foreclosing the mortgage 'without any costs and attorney's fee being taxed against them * * *.'
Defendants first assert that the court erred in sustaining the motion for judgment on the pleadings because their answer raised issues of fact. We do not agree that the answer raised issues of fact as to the mortgage, defendant' interest in the real property, or the right to foreclose. Rather, the trial court correctly construed this answer to be a disclaimer of any ownership by defendants of the real property covered by the mortgage. The affirmative allegations of the answer and the issues made therein relate to these...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Harvey v. Auto Plus of Woodward
...by assessing costs for mileage and copy charges). “The taxing of costs is discretionary with the court.” Pierson v. Am. Nat. Bank of Shawnee, 1958 OK 111, 325 P.2d 426, 428 (citing 12 O.S.1951 § 930). Title 12, § 1757 allows the discretionary transfer of small claims cases. Eskridge v. Ladd......
-
Morgan v. Galilean Health Enterprises, Inc.
...26, p 5, 646 P.2d 601, 603; City Nat'l Bank & Trust Co. v. Owens, 1977 OK 86, p 11, 565 P.2d 4, 7. Cf. Pierson v. American National Bank of Shawnee, 1958 OK 111, p 5, 325 P.2d 426, 428.21 City Nat'l Bank & Trust Co. v. Owens, 1977 OK 86, p 11, 565 P.2d 4, 7.22 See supra, note 19 for the res......
-
Holbert v. Echeverria
...Hoebel, Okl., 646 P.2d 601, 603 [1982]; City Nat. Bank & Trust Co. v. Owens, Okl., 565 P.2d 4 [1977] and Pierson v. American National Bank of Shawnee, Okl., 325 P.2d 426, 428 [1958].23 Moses v. Hoebel, supra note 22 at 603 and City Nat. Bank & Trust Co. v. Owens, supra note 22.The language ......
-
Moses v. Hoebel
...1166, 1168 (1978).3 City National Bank & Trust Company of Oklahoma City v. Owens, Okl., 565 P.2d 4 (1977); Pierson v. American National Bank of Shawnee, Okl., 325 P.2d 426, 428 (1958).4 City National Bank & Trust Company of Oklahoma City v. Owens, supra note 3. The language of the U.S. Supr......