¶ 8 The fresh Court from Municipal Is attractive correctly observed your $85, shape towards worth of the house is at the new large stop of the imagine from Mr. Robey, that is from the realtor industry. Mr. Robey and additionally testified the house or property is actually resold for $71,, and therefore amount the latest trial courtroom are liberated to accept much more indicative off market price. Appropriately, one to wisdom is actually supported by the data showed, and will not in any way oppose the brand new conclusions of fact by the demonstration courtroom.
¶ nine The newest Robeys and demand the demonstration court erred within the decreasing to help you award them a keen attorney’s fee. They argue that given that findings of-fact were “a reasonable lawyer payment as set because of the Court up on proper application” your courtroom is required to honor the new attorney’s percentage. This new trial court seem to reconsidered you to definitely honor as diary admission denied the Robeys an attorney’s percentage. The Court regarding Civil Appeals confirmed.
First Federal Financial, 1970 Okay 162, 475 P
¶ ten The newest Robeys allege he could be eligible to an attorney’s percentage pursuant in order to 42 O.S.2001, § 176, that offers: “Inside a task delivered to demand one lien the fresh new team to own which view try made shall be eligible to get well a good attorney’s fee, to be fixed by the legal, hence might be taxed as will cost you in the action.” The brand new Robeys dispute their action up against Enough time Seashore is for deprivation of its statutory proper once the lienholders so you’re able to receive the home, that renders the experience you to enforce a beneficial lien.
¶ 11 Identity 42 O.S.2001, § 19 provides this option who has got good lien that is substandard to some other on the same possessions has actually a right to redeem the home in the sense as the proprietor you will, throughout the advanced lien. The new Robeys met with the statutory straight to get the property away from Long Seashore. The brand new Robeys had been provided injuries from the trial legal once the Much time Seashore had notice it claimed a lien throughout the assets. twelve O.S.2001, § 764(A)(1). When Much time Coastline didn’t provide find of your foreclosures and revenue, it stopped the fresh new Robeys out of redeeming the house. The individuals liberties are statutory occurring out from the lien the latest Robeys had against the assets.
The older lienholder intervened and properly built new top priority of their lien
¶ 12 Much time Coastline measures up the information in cases like this in order to Boundary Provided. Sav. and Mortgage Ass’n vmercial Lender, 1990 Ok CIV App 105, 806 P.2d 1140. If so, a few finance companies kept notes produced by the same borrower. This new $29, mention kept by Commercial Bank was safeguarded by almost every other commercial paper, which had been also from inside the standard. The banks separately sued new debtor, and you can just after providing wisdom, Commercial Lender ended up selling the newest collateral in the sheriff’s sale, which have see so you can Boundary https://pdqtitleloans.com/payday-loans-pa/. Boundary objected, but did not focus on the verification buy. Boundary after that filed another step, saying it stored a properly-perfected shelter need for the fresh new collateralized commercial paper by the virtue out-of a post-judgment garnishment continuing, and you may desired actual and you may punitive injuries getting losses obtain due to Industrial Bank’s commercially-unreasonably serves. The fresh new demonstration legal ruled and only Industrial Financial, however, declined Commercial’s application having a keen attorney’s percentage not as much as § 176. The latest Judge regarding Appeals verified, recognizing the fit wasn’t one enforce an effective lien, one Frontier Bank in reality didn’t come with lien toward collateralized industrial report. Conversely, new Robeys had a lien to the real estate foreclosed because of the Much time Beach.
¶ 13 The fresh new Boundary case cites so it Court’s decision typically Electric Borrowing Corp. v. 2d 137, given that authority because of its carrying. In general Electric, the newest junior lienholder sued the principal debtors. New older lienholder upcoming made an effort to assemble a keen attorney’s percentage regarding the fresh junior lienholder. The newest demo courtroom declined the cost, hence Court verified, observing that lienholders hadn’t affirmatively asserted their claims up against both, but alternatively simply from the borrower. Standard Electronic, 1970 Okay 162, ¶ 8, 475 P.2d within 138. The Robeys enjoys asserted its allege facing Enough time Coastline, hence differentiates this case out of General Digital.