DOCSLIB.ORG

Freeing Mortgages of Merger

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Freeing Mortgages of Merger Vanderbilt Law Review Volume 40 Issue 2 Issue 2 - March 1987 Article 2 3-1987 Freeing Mortgages of Merger Ann M. Burkhart Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr Part of the Property Law and Real Estate Commons Recommended Citation Ann M. Burkhart, Freeing Mortgages of Merger, 40 Vanderbilt Law Review 283 (1987) Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr/vol40/iss2/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Vanderbilt Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Freeing Mortgages of Merger Ann M. Burkhart* I. INTRODUCTION .................................. 284 II. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT ....................... 288 A. Doctrine of M erger ........................ 288 B. Mortgages ................................. 303 1. English Development .................. 303 2. American Development ................ 319 III. M ODERN CONTEXT .............................. 329 A. Merger and Mortgages ..................... 330 1. Mortgagee Acquires Title to the Encum- bered Property ........................ 331 a. Junior Liens .................... 332 b. Former Owner's Bankruptcy ...... 336 i. Fraudulent Transfer ......... 337 ii. Preference .................. 340 iii. Other Federal or State Laws . 341 c. Validity of the Deed-in-Lieu Transaction ..................... 342 2. Property Owner Acquires Lien .......... 362 B. Merger and Debts ......................... 369 1. Effect of Mortgagee's Property Acquisi- tion on Debt Enforceability ............ 373 a. Voluntary Conveyance ........... 373 b. Involuntary Conveyance ......... 377 2. Effect of Property Owner's Note and Mortgage Acquisition on Debt Enforce- ability ................................ 383 IV. CONCLUSION .................................... 386 *Associate Professor of Law, University of Minnesota. VANDERBILT LAW REVIEW [Vol. 40:283 I. INTRODUCTION Change in real property law often occurs with glacial speed. This rate of change in part reflects the normal inertia of estab- lished law. A more complete explanation, however, is the innate conservatism connected to a commodity that once was the primary source of wealth and power. That this conservatism is innate should not prevent application of Ockham's razor as needed. The relationship of the doctrine of merger to the burgeoning law of mortgages is one such area. "If the law has to bear these medieval shackles the time surely has come to examine them carefully. They may have rusted away."1 The modern doctrine of merger is easily stated: When a per- son holds two estates in property in the same right and without an intervening estate, the two estates will coalesce to one estate unless a beneficial reason exists for keeping them distinct.2 For example, a life tenant who acquires the reversion immediately following his life estate usually will be deemed to own the fee simple title rather than a separate life estate and reversion.3 Similarly, a tenant for years who acquires the landlord's interest in the leased property usually will be deemed to own the fee simple title.4 The doctrine of merger operates in these cases as a technical, nonsubstantive rule concerning property titles. If the holder of the interests is not ben- efited in any way by keeping the estates distinct, they will merge to simplify the state of title. Although the application of merger to separate estates in land is generally straightforward, the application of the doctrine to lesser property rights is far from clear. Indeed, with respect to questions involving title to property and a mortgage encumbering that property, merger has been described as "one of the most com- plex and confusing areas of the law of mortgages."5 Examination of 1. Industrial Properties (Barton Hill) Ltd. v. Associated Elec. Indus. Ltd., [1977] 1 Q.B. 580, 613. 2. 4 AMERICAN LAW OF PROPERTY § 16.142 (A. Casner ed. 1952) [hereinafter AM. L. PROP.]; 3 R. POWELL, THE LAW OF REAL PROPERTY %459 (P. Rohan rev. ed. 1984); 5 H. TIFFANY, REAL PROPERTY § 1479 (B. Jones 3d ed. 1939). 3. See, e.g., Citizens Bank & Trust Co. v. Watkins, 215 N.C. 292, 296, 1 S.E.2d 853, 856 (1939). Merger will not apply if the interests are held in different "rights." Therefore, if the trustee of a life estate acquires the reversion immediately following the life estate in his individual capacity, the life estate and reversion will not merge because the life estate is held in trust and the reversion is held in the owner's individual capacity. 4. See, e.g., Buell v. Simon Newman Co., 61 F. Supp. 157, 160 (N.D. Cal. 1945); Thomas v. Farr, 380 Ill. 429, 431, 44 N.E.2d 434, 435 (1942). 5. G. NELSON & D. WHITMAN, REAL ESTATE FINANCE LAW § 6.15 (2d ed. 1985). Other 1987] FREEING MORTGAGES OF MERGER the historical developments of merger and of mortgages reveals why their union has created theoretical and practical problems: the modern mortgage does not create an interest in land to which merger should apply.' Furthermore, modern title and finance prac- tices have obviated the need for merger. The doctrine of merger and the practice of using land as security for the repayment of loans, integral parts of English land law since the feudal period, originated when the common law of property was in its infancy. The advantages of the abstract concept of title had not been discovered; recognized interests in land con- sisted primarily of the right to possess or to receive feudal inci- dents as an overlord. With the increase in property transactions, merger and mortgages developed as transactional devices. Despite substantial alterations in title forms and practices since the incep- tions of merger and of mortgages approximately seven hundred years ago, courts continue to apply merger largely unchanged to the modern mortgage, a property interest that bears only one fea- ture in common with its feudal counterpart-the existence of a debt. If the continued application of merger to mortgages created no problem other than a problem of theory, even such a thoroughgo- ing theorist as a legal scholar might be willing to ignore the prob- lem as a harmless anachronism. Continued application of merger to mortgages, however, often has adverse and occasionally devas- tating economic effects without serving any beneficial purpose. Courts' rote applications of merger to mortgage interests have unnecessarily destroyed valuable property rights and have wrong- fully created others. Additionally, as bad law begets worse, mis- perceptions concerning the doctrine have caused many courts to apply the doctrine not only to interests in property, but also to debts secured by property as if debt were a new variety of real commentators have described the topic as "[o]ne of the most perplexing incidents of title," G. WARVELLE, ABSTRACTS AND EXAMINATIONS OF TITLE § 347 (4th ed. 1921); and as "a fear- some title, because it invokes the fine points that attend the law of real property." 1 G. GLENN, MORTGAGES § 45.2 (1943). 6. Throughout this Article, the term "mortgage" will be used to refer to all types of real property security instruments, including deeds of trust and deeds to secure debt. Although the various types of real property security instruments differ in some respects, the issues raised in this Article concerning the applicability of merger apply with equal force to each type of instrument. See generally 1 G. GLENN, supra note 5, § 1. Similarly, although this Article focuses on real property security interests, merger applies with equal force to personal property security interests. See, e.g., Wilhelmi v. Leo- nard, 13 Iowa 330 (1862); Food City, Inc. v. Fleming Cos, Inc., 590 S.W.2d 754 (Tex. 1979). VANDERBILT LAW REVIEW [Vol. 40:283 property interest. With respect to mortgages, the merger issue typically arises when a secured lender agrees to accept title to the encumbered property from the defaulting debtor in lieu of foreclosing its mort- gage on the property. In this way, the borrower and lender avoid the time and expense of a foreclosure action. As described in this Article, if a court holds that the lender's mortgage lien thereby merged into its fee title, the lender usually will be an unsecured, rather than a secured, creditor if the debtor's conveyance to it is voided, such as in connection with the debtor's subsequent bank- ruptcy. Furthermore, the lender will be unable to clear the title of junior liens although the law is well established that the lender could have done so if its lien did not merge. These merger-related problems are not outweighed by any beneficial effect of merger. As the number of loan defaults and foreclosures occurring nationwide has increased to the greatest level since the Great De- pression of the 1930s,7 the problems created by the misapplication 7. During 1985, delinquencies on debts secured by one to four unit residential proper- ties ranged from 6.19% during the first quarter to 5.72% during the fourth quarter, which is more than double the rate during the 1950s. Foreclosure actions were commenced during 1985 against .92% of all one to four unit residential properties encumbered by mortgages, as contrasted with .59% just five years earlier. See MORTGAGE BANKERS ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, ECONOMICS DEP'T, JUNE 1985 REPORT. See also STATISTICS AND ANALYSIS DIVISION, OFFICE OF POLICY AND ECONOMIC RESEARCH, FED. HOME LOAN BANK BD., REPORT ON MORT- GAGE FORECLOSURES BY FSLIC-INSURED SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS (1984). During fiscal year 1985, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) acquired approximately 38,000 houses through foreclosure and, after selling all but 16,700 properties, estimated the value of its holdings to be $627,500,000. The agency's deputy assis- tant secretary for single family housing estimates that HUD may acquire more than 40,000 additional properties during 1986. At the end of January 1986, the Veterans Administration owned 18,783 properties as a result of loan defaults, with an estimated aggregate value of $787,000,000, and acquisition procedures had been commenced for an additional 14,809 properties as a result of loan defaults.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Will Mortgage Law Survive ? a Commentary and Critique on Mortgage Law's Birth, Long Life, and Current Proposals for Its Demise
    Case Western Reserve Law Review Volume 54 Issue 1 Article 4 2003 Will Mortgage Law Survive ? A Commentary and Critique on Mortgage Law's Birth, Long Life, and Current Proposals for Its Demise Morris G. Shanker Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/caselrev Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Morris G. Shanker, Will Mortgage Law Survive ? A Commentary and Critique on Mortgage Law's Birth, Long Life, and Current Proposals for Its Demise, 54 Case W. Rsrv. L. Rev. 69 (2003) Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/caselrev/vol54/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Journals at Case Western Reserve University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Case Western Reserve Law Review by an authorized administrator of Case Western Reserve University School of Law Scholarly Commons. WILL MORTGAGE LAW SURVIVE? A COMMENTARY AND CRITIQUE ON MORTGAGE LAW'S BIRTH, LONG LIFE, AND CURRENT PROPOSALS FOR ITS DEMISE Morris G. Shankert PROLOGUE Recent reports that mortgage law may soon die are not exag- gerated! 1 Present day mortgage law has been with us for four centuries. It originated in the seventeenth century when equity took it over from the common law courts. Equity applied to mortgages its ar- senal of equitable principles, particularly those limiting forfeitures of property. It then built upon these principles to develop a set that was unique to mortgages. The foundational principle prohib- ited the clogging of the debtor's (mortgagor's) equity of redemp- tion.2 Essentially, this prohibited the mortgagee from retaining any interest in the mortgagor's property once the underlying debt had been paid.
    [Show full text]
  • LECTURE 5 the Origins of Feudalism
    OUTLINE — LECTURE 5 The Origins of Feudalism A Brief Sketch of Political History from Clovis (d. 511) to Henry IV (d. 1106) 632 death of Mohammed The map above shows to the growth of the califate to roughly 750. The map above shows Europe and the East Roman Empire from 533 to roughly 600. – 2 – The map above shows the growth of Frankish power from 481 to 814. 486 – 511 Clovis, son of Merovich, king of the Franks 629 – 639 Dagobert, last effective Merovingian king of the Franks 680 – 714 Pepin of Heristal, mayor of the palace 714 – 741 Charles Martel, mayor (732(3), battle of Tours/Poitiers) 714 – 751 - 768 Pepin the Short, mayor then king 768 – 814 Charlemagne, king (emperor, 800 – 814) 814 – 840 Louis the Pious (emperor) – 3 – The map shows the Carolingian empire, the Byzantine empire, and the Califate in 814. – 4 – The map shows the breakup of the Carolingian empire from 843–888. West Middle East 840–77 Charles the Bald 840–55 Lothair, emp. 840–76 Louis the German 855–69 Lothair II – 5 – The map shows the routes of various Germanic invaders from 150 to 1066. Our focus here is on those in dark orange, whom Shepherd calls ‘Northmen: Danes and Normans’, popularly ‘Vikings’. – 6 – The map shows Europe and the Byzantine empire about the year 1000. France Germany 898–922 Charles the Simple 919–36 Henry the Fowler 936–62–73 Otto the Great, kg. emp. 973–83 Otto II 987–96 Hugh Capet 983–1002 Otto III 1002–1024 Henry II 996–1031 Robert II the Pious 1024–39 Conrad II 1031–1060 Henry I 1039–56 Henry III 1060–1108 Philip I 1056–1106 Henry IV – 7 – The map shows Europe and the Mediterranean lands in roughly the year 1097.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Notes on Manors & Manorial History
    SOME NOTES ON MANORS & MANORIAL HISTORY BY A. HAMILTON THOMPSON, M.A.. D.Litt.. F.B.A..F.S.A. Some Notes on Manors & Manorial History By A. Hamilton Thompson, M.A., D.Litt., F.B.A., F.S.A. The popular idea of a manor assumes that it is a fixed geo­ graphical area with definite boundaries, which belongs to a lord with certain rights over his tenants. In common usage, we speak of this or that lordship, almost in the same way in which we refer to a parish. It is very difficult, however, to give the word an exclusively geographical meaning. If we examine one of those documents which are known as Inquisitions post mortem, for example, we shall find that, at the death of a tenant who holds his property directly from the Crown, the king's escheator will make an extent, that is, a detailed valuation, of his manors. This will consist for the most part of a list of a number of holdings with names of the tenants, specifying the rent or other services due to the lord from each. These holdings will, it is true, be generally gathered together in one or more vills or townships, of which the manor may roughly be said to consist. But it will often be found that there are outlying holdings in other vills which owe service to a manor, the nucleus of which is at some distance. Thus the members of the manor of Rothley lay scattered at various distances from their centre, divided from it and from each other by other lordships.
    [Show full text]
  • Installment Land Contracts: Developing Law in Virginia
    Washington and Lee Law Review Volume 37 | Issue 4 Article 8 Fall 9-1-1980 Installment Land Contracts: Developing Law in Virginia Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr Part of the Property Law and Real Estate Commons, and the Secured Transactions Commons Recommended Citation Installment Land Contracts: Developing Law in Virginia, 37 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 1161 (1980), https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr/vol37/iss4/8 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington and Lee Law Review at Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington and Lee Law Review by an authorized editor of Washington & Lee University School of Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Notes INSTALLMENT LAND CONTRACTS: DEVELOPING LAW IN VIRGINIA An installment land sale contract1 is a method of seller financing for land sales. The land contract, sometimes referred to as a "contract for deed" or "longterm contract," functions as a substitute for a mortgage or deed of trust.2 Generally, in a mortgage, the seller conveys title to the property, and the buyer obtains financing by pledging the property as security for the purchase price of the land.3 The mortgagee has a lien on the buyer's title.4 In a deed of trust transaction, the buyer conveys title to the property to a third party to hold as trustee during the period of in- debtedness. 5 In a land contract, the seller finances the land sale retaining legal title to the property until the buyer makes the final installment payment.e Land contracts are used most often in states in which- mortgage law heavily favors the mortgagor.7 Pro-mortgagor law restricts the mortga- gee's right to enforce the lien on the property by prescribing lengthy pro- cedures for mortgage foreclosure.8 Sellers often prefer land contracts be- ' G.
    [Show full text]
  • “Cash for Keys” Agreements James Smith, Reporter May 17, 2012
    MEMORANDUM “Cash for Keys” Agreements James Smith, Reporter May 17, 2012 “Cash for keys” agreements are used in two sectors in the context of residential mortgage foreclosures. First, lenders have offered cash-for-keys agreements to homeowners who have defaulted on their home mortgage loans and are in the midst of foreclosure proceedings or are headed towards foreclosure. In this context of owner- occupied housing, cash for keys is considered by some to be one of the types of “graceful exits,” which results in the homeowner leaving without the need for completion of a foreclosure proceeding. Second, lenders have also used cash-for-keys agreements when foreclosing upon rental properties. Lenders pay tenants to vacate their premises when the landlord-mortgagor is facing or has suffered a foreclosure. In both settings – owner-occupied housing and rental housing – the lender’s objective is the same: to remove occupants from dwelling units at a lower cost than that associated with the normal foreclosure process. Projected cost savings have both a temporal component and a regulatory component. The process of foreclosure and eviction is lengthy and costly when conducted in accordance with applicable laws. In most jurisdictions it takes a substantial amount of time to evict defaulting mortgagors from their homes. Generally recovering possession from a mortgagor cannot be accomplished, due to legal or practical restraints, until after completion of a foreclosure sale. In some states, eviction is delayed further due to an owner’s statutory right of redemption, which lasts for a time period after the foreclosure sale. Similarly, it is time consuming to evict tenants from dwelling units in most jurisdictions, even when there is proof that the lease has terminated due to the tenant’s default, has expired in accordance with its terms, or has ended as a consequence of the completion of foreclosure.
    [Show full text]
  • The Condominium Act
    REPUBLIC ACT NO. 4726 AN ACT TO DEFINE CONDOMINIM, ESTABLISH REQURIEMENTS FOR ITS CREATION, AND GOVERN ITS INCIDNETS SECTION 1. The short title of this Act shall be The Condominium Act. SECTION 2. A condominium is an interest in real property consisting of a separate interest in a unit in a residential, industrial or commercial building and an undivided interest in common directly or indirectly, in the land which it is located and in other common areas of the building. A condominium may include, in addition, a separate interest in other portions of such real property. Title to the common areas, including the land, or the appurtenant interests in such areas, may be held by a corporation specially formed for the purpose (hereinafter known as the condominium corporation) in which the holders of separate interests shall automatically be members or share−holders, to the exclusion of others, in proportion to the appurtenant interest of their respective units in the common areas. The interests in condominium may be ownership or any other interest in real property recognized by the law of property in the Civil Code and other pertinent laws. SECTION 3. As used in this Act, unless the context otherwise requires: a. Condominium means a condominium as defined in the next preceding section. b. Unit means a part of the condominium project intended for any type of independent use or ownership, including one or more rooms or spaces located in one or more floors (or part or parts of floors) in a building or buildings and such accessories as may be appended thereto.
    [Show full text]
  • Mortgage Law Today, 13 J. Marshall L. Rev. 251 (1980)
    UIC Law Review Volume 13 Issue 2 Article 2 Winter 1980 Mortgage Law Today, 13 J. Marshall L. Rev. 251 (1980) Robert Kratovil Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.uic.edu/lawreview Part of the Commercial Law Commons, and the Property Law and Real Estate Commons Recommended Citation Robert Kratovil, Mortgage Law Today, 13 J. Marshall L. Rev. 251 (1980) https://repository.law.uic.edu/lawreview/vol13/iss2/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by UIC Law Open Access Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in UIC Law Review by an authorized administrator of UIC Law Open Access Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MORTGAGE LAW TODAY ROBERT KRATOVIL* THE BACKGROUND Few people are aware that until the 1920's the majority of mortgage lenders were individuals rather than financial institu- tions.' Often the parties proceeded quite informally and ignored established legal procedures. This resulted in a vast amount of early litigation; for example, dealing with dishonesty problems regarding payment. At times the mortgagee sold both the mort- gage and note, often at a discount, to a third party without noti- fying the mortgagor. When payment became due, the mortgagor paid the debt to the mortgagee, who in turn accepted a payment he should have refused. 2 By the end of World War II, mortgage lending had become the business of financial institutions. Dis- honesty of the sort cited disappeared, and the reported accounts of such dishonesty vanished. Today, all but an insignificant percentage of mortgage lend- ing is institutionalized.
    [Show full text]
  • Leasing and Loaning but Losing Track of the Difference Roger Bernhardt Golden Gate University School of Law, [email protected]
    Golden Gate University School of Law GGU Law Digital Commons Publications Faculty Scholarship 7-2001 Leasing and Loaning but Losing Track of the Difference Roger Bernhardt Golden Gate University School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/pubs Part of the Property Law and Real Estate Commons Recommended Citation Bernhardt, Roger, "Leasing and Loaning but Losing Track of the Difference" (2001). Publications. Paper 321. http://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/pubs/321 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at GGU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Publications by an authorized administrator of GGU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. July 2001 MIDCOURSE CORRECTION Leasing and Loaning but Losing Track of the Difference ROGER BERNHARDT Vallely Investments, L.P. v BancAmerica Commercial Corp. (2001) 88 CA4th 816, 106 CR2d 689, reported in this issue at p 201, demonstrates that knowing a lot about mortgage law won’t make up for forgetting some elementary principles of landlord-tenant law. As a leasehold mortgagee intending to foreclose, the bank obviously put a good deal of thought into how best to work out matters with its trustor-borrower as far as the mortgage was concerned. But it failed to appreciate that its debtor was a tenant on a lease as well as a trustor on its deed of trust, and that the lease had seniority over the mortgage. The terms of the lease reflected thoughtful bargaining by the parties.
    [Show full text]
  • Index of Cheshire Place-Names
    INDEX OF CHESHIRE PLACE-NAMES Acton, 12 Bowdon, 14 Adlington, 7 Bradford, 12 Alcumlow, 9 Bradley, 12 Alderley, 3, 9 Bradwall, 14 Aldersey, 10 Bramhall, 14 Aldford, 1,2, 12, 21 Bredbury, 12 Alpraham, 9 Brereton, 14 Alsager, 10 Bridgemere, 14 Altrincham, 7 Bridge Traffbrd, 16 n Alvanley, 10 Brindley, 14 Alvaston, 10 Brinnington, 7 Anderton, 9 Broadbottom, 14 Antrobus, 21 Bromborough, 14 Appleton, 12 Broomhall, 14 Arden, 12 Bruera, 21 Arley, 12 Bucklow, 12 Arrowe, 3 19 Budworth, 10 Ashton, 12 Buerton, 12 Astbury, 13 Buglawton, II n Astle, 13 Bulkeley, 14 Aston, 13 Bunbury, 10, 21 Audlem, 5 Burton, 12 Austerson, 10 Burwardsley, 10 Butley, 10 By ley, 10 Bache, 11 Backford, 13 Baddiley, 10 Caldecote, 14 Baddington, 7 Caldy, 17 Baguley, 10 Calveley, 14 Balderton, 9 Capenhurst, 14 Barnshaw, 10 Garden, 14 Barnston, 10 Carrington, 7 Barnton, 7 Cattenhall, 10 Barrow, 11 Caughall, 14 Barthomley, 9 Chadkirk, 21 Bartington, 7 Cheadle, 3, 21 Barton, 12 Checkley, 10 Batherton, 9 Chelford, 10 Bebington, 7 Chester, 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 10, 12, 16, 17, Beeston, 13 19,21 Bexton, 10 Cheveley, 10 Bickerton, 14 Chidlow, 10 Bickley, 10 Childer Thornton, 13/; Bidston, 10 Cholmondeley, 9 Birkenhead, 14, 19 Cholmondeston, 10 Blackden, 14 Chorley, 12 Blacon, 14 Chorlton, 12 Blakenhall, 14 Chowley, 10 Bollington, 9 Christleton, 3, 6 Bosden, 10 Church Hulme, 21 Bosley, 10 Church Shocklach, 16 n Bostock, 10 Churton, 12 Bough ton, 12 Claughton, 19 171 172 INDEX OF CHESHIRE PLACE-NAMES Claverton, 14 Godley, 10 Clayhanger, 14 Golborne, 14 Clifton, 12 Gore, 11 Clive, 11 Grafton,
    [Show full text]
  • Uniform Assignment of Rents Act
    D R A F T FOR APPROVAL UNIFORM ASSIGNMENT OF RENTS ACT NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF COMMISSIONERS ON UNIFORM STATE LAWS MEETING IN ITS ONE-HUNDRED-AND-FOURTEENTH YEAR PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA JULY 22 - 29, 2005 UNIFORM ASSIGNMENT OF RENTS ACT WITH PREFATORY NOTE AND PRELIMINARY COMMENTS Copyright ©2005 By NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF COMMISSIONERS ON UNIFORM STATE LAWS The ideas and conclusions set forth in this draft, including the proposed statutory language and any comments or reporter’s notes, have not been passed upon by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws or the Drafting Committee. They do not necessarily reflect the views of the Conference and its Commissioners and the Drafting Committee and its Members and Reporters. Proposed statutory language may not be used to ascertain the intent or meaning of any promulgated final statutory proposal. DRAFTING COMMITTEE ON UNIFORM ASSIGNMENT OF RENTS ACT The Committee appointed by and representing the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws in preparing this Uniform Assignment of Rents Act consists of the following individuals: MICHAEL B. GETTY, 1560 Sandburg Terr., Suite 1104, Chicago, IL 60610, Chair TERRY J. CARE, 333 S. Sixth St., Las Vegas, NV 89101 THOMAS T. GRIMSHAW, 1700 Lincoln St., Suite 3800, Denver, CO 80203 BARRY C. HAWKINS, 300 Atlantic St., Stamford, CT 06901, Enactment Plan Coordinator THEODORE C. KRAMER, 45 Walnut St., Brattleboro, VT 05301 EDWARD F. LOWRY, JR., 4200 N. 82nd St., Suite 2001, Scottsdale, AZ 85251 ROGER P. MORGAN, 2 Grennan Rd., West Hartford, CT 06107 PATRICK A. RANDOLPH, JR., University of Missouri - Kansas City, School of Law, 5100 Rockhill Rd., Kansas City, MO 64110 EDWIN E.
    [Show full text]
  • Areas Designated As 'Rural' for Right to Buy Purposes
    Areas designated as 'Rural' for right to buy purposes Region District Designated areas Date designated East Rutland the parishes of Ashwell, Ayston, Barleythorpe, Barrow, 17 March Midlands Barrowden, Beaumont Chase, Belton, Bisbrooke, Braunston, 2004 Brooke, Burley, Caldecott, Clipsham, Cottesmore, Edith SI 2004/418 Weston, Egleton, Empingham, Essendine, Exton, Glaston, Great Casterton, Greetham, Gunthorpe, Hambelton, Horn, Ketton, Langham, Leighfield, Little Casterton, Lyddington, Lyndon, Manton, Market Overton, Martinsthorpe, Morcott, Normanton, North Luffenham, Pickworth, Pilton, Preston, Ridlington, Ryhall, Seaton, South Luffenham, Stoke Dry, Stretton, Teigh, Thistleton, Thorpe by Water, Tickencote, Tinwell, Tixover, Wardley, Whissendine, Whitwell, Wing. East of North Norfolk the whole district, with the exception of the parishes of 15 February England Cromer, Fakenham, Holt, North Walsham and Sheringham 1982 SI 1982/21 East of Kings Lynn and the parishes of Anmer, Bagthorpe with Barmer, Barton 17 March England West Norfolk Bendish, Barwick, Bawsey, Bircham, Boughton, Brancaster, 2004 Burnham Market, Burnham Norton, Burnham Overy, SI 2004/418 Burnham Thorpe, Castle Acre, Castle Rising, Choseley, Clenchwarton, Congham, Crimplesham, Denver, Docking, Downham West, East Rudham, East Walton, East Winch, Emneth, Feltwell, Fincham, Flitcham cum Appleton, Fordham, Fring, Gayton, Great Massingham, Grimston, Harpley, Hilgay, Hillington, Hockwold-Cum-Wilton, Holme- Next-The-Sea, Houghton, Ingoldisthorpe, Leziate, Little Massingham, Marham, Marshland
    [Show full text]
  • Hockenhull Lane Tarvin, Chester, Cheshire CH3 8LB £325,000
    2 Cuppin Street, Chester, Cheshire, CH1 2BN Tel: 01244 404040 Fax: 01244 321246 Email: [email protected] Hockenhull Lane Tarvin, Chester, Cheshire CH3 8LB £325,000 * SOUGHT AFTER VILLAGE LOCATION * FOUR BEDROOMS * DELIGHTFUL REAR GARDEN. A modern four bedroom detached house occupying a pleasant position along Hockenhull Lane in the popular village of Tarvin. The accommodation briefly comprises: porch, entrance hall, living room, separate dining room with patio doors to outside, fitted kitchen with 'range style' cooker, landing with walk-in airing cupboard, four good sized bedrooms and family shower room. The property benefits from UPVC double glazed windows and has gas fired central heating with a condensing gas fired central heating boiler. Externally there is a tarmac driveway at the front providing parking for several vehicles. with brick edging leading to an integral garage workshop/utility. To the rear there is an Indian stone flagged patio with dwarf brick wall and lawned garden which enjoys a sunny aspect. Viewing recommended. www.cavendishresidential.com Hockenhull Lane, Tarvin, Chester, Cheshire CH3 8LB LOCATION CLOAKROOM/WC The village of Tarvin is situated approximately Low level dual-flush WC, pedestal wash hand 6½ miles from Chester city centre with local basin, wall light, electric shaver point, single shops and amenities to include a recently radiator with thermostat, part-tiled walls, opened Cooperative food store, the George hanging for cloaks, tiled floor and UPVC double and Dragon public house, The Red Lion public glazed window with obscured glass. house, Gunnery Restaurant Bar and Deli, a fish LIVING ROOM and chip shop, Jessops Deli, post office and 4.55m x 3.48m (14'11" x 11'5") newsagents, coffee shop, medical centre, UPVC double glazed window overlooking the dentist, barbers and beauty salon.
    [Show full text]