Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1940 )


Menu:
  • Zionorabls Xoaar Oarrts~n, Jr., ~Direotor
    Department oi Public Saroty
    Austin, Tezaa
    Dear Sir:            Attsntlont Yr. Ralph L. Buall
    6:   188uuaoe or a certirloateor
    0 motor vshlolo to
    title ~011
    a aortgugos who rspoame8se8
    a motor vehfcle and sell8 the
    uuder P power
    snzm to hlm.cr1.i
    of prlrata sale contained in the
    mortgafp.
    #a are in rnoeipt'oryour letter of &woh 89, I.940,
    ln~~hlehyou re2u4st am opiaion:ef this depnrtmsnt 0~ tha
    followingquestion aontalned thermin: .
    ?Vfhana mortgagor ropomronm488 rotor To-.-
    tiol0(holding pc~amw~i4ntharsor a8 a trustee)
    may bhe mortgaagoo(truStee)aaL the rehielo to
    hinrselfes a I;riratapurokumorand thus ao-,uiro
    ownarshlp or the rebiele aad bearme entitled to
    a Certlllcateor Title agaknst thenvcrhioleVa
    This d~puxtmuit ruled in Opinion No. O-1984,.that
    uhsre a mortgagee repostmsao8u motor vahiole and sells the
    same et a private sale, whioh procedure Is in eoeerdaao~
    with the terms ef the mortgage, Four departmmt is author-
    ized to lesus 0 Certifioata0r Title in the 0111100r the pur-
    ohaaer at suoh ;u4vate ioreolosurs s61e. In your question
    here you are conca~nrrdwith the oituatfon#hero the mort-
    e&se hlmielt purahams the -ptopextyet such private roru-
    closure sale and applies for B Certificate of Title in his
    Eouoreble HoiuerGarrison,Jr., ?age S
    own name.
    In our Opinion No.     4 viepointed out that the
    right to foreolose by private Bale la oontraotual and that
    suoh a provision oontainedin a mortgage ie not against
    public policy. In line with thie authorltles iuthie state
    hold that where under the term of a martgage the uortgagee
    18 permitted to be a purchaser at a sale oonduoted by hl~U
    under the power of private sale contained thereiu that auoh
    l?rovisionis not against public polioy and 1s not void. The
    SUPremS Court of Texas in the oase or The Hoards T. m~ls,
    6 Ter. 173, held that the mortgagee muId be a purclhaser at
    a sale oonduoted under the power or sale oontained in the
    mortgaage.This rule of Law was again announced by the Suprams
    Court in the oa6e of Soott v. Xanu, 
    33 Tex. 786
    , To the sama
    dr4hti a44 the 0888 of Goodgame v. Rueh+g, 36 TAX. 7e3, by
    the supreme Court or Texae.
    It is to be note& that the&e old Supreme Court oa~e&~
    reoognize that a mortgagee may purchase at a rorealoeure sale
    aonduoted under the power of sale eoutaided~l.nthemrtgage.
    ID each of those oases, however, It ia mntcsplated thatthe
    8ale conductednil.Ibe a public and open one. The rule as
    to the ri&d or the mortgaageeto purohaee would or ueoesslty
    have to be extended to a puraimae at private sale beoause he
    acts h.exaotlp the Saae uapaoity under the law ln selling
    property.ata private foreoloeure 8ale as he does at publlo
    roreolomre sale, each of whioh la Ifade.uuler the ,termeof
    the power ol,saIe aontaiued 5.athe mortgage. The rule Is
    stated in 
    5 Barb. C
    . L. 490 as tollorsr
    Yt is generally recognizedthat the mort-
    gagea rmy purchase at the oale with the oonaeut
    or the mortgagor given orally or In the mart-
    gage itself. It ha8 been ruled that a mortgagee
    nraypurohase the mortgaged ohattels, even iu the
    absence 0r 4X5W488 ooneent b the mortpfor, Onl{
    where the aale is oonduoted 1XIgood ia,t and no
    iu fraud or the rights of the mortgagor. . . .v
    Iu the 0886 0r Davenport 0. San Antonio Mailaohfae
    a
    supply co., 59 S. W. tea) 807, the an  m0ni0   GOU*  0r civil
    AppeaIs'heldthat a corpcmatlonin which the mrtga@e va8 a
    atookholderoould purehaae at a publio sale made ander the
    pcwer or sale oontainea in the mortgage.
    Tha oaBe whioh oomea nearer to covering the question
    you ask thau any other 16 the ease of GampbeII v. Eaateru Seed
    iicnorable   Earner   GBrrlson,   Jr.,   Pug4   3
    6, GitSlR CO., 109 S. Vi.(Zd) 997. ln,thia case the mortegse
    repoaseaasdthe yroperty and made a yrlvate sala without
    sotioe to the mortgagor cud the aortgaeee was the purolessr
    at such givate *do. .Ths &en @onlo    Cowt          Of   Clvll Appeals
    sustained the ea&e and stated as icllower
    *It was exprsssly providsb in the mcft-
    gge   thatthe mortgages nsad nat &ve notice
    of the exeroise of Its option to forealcse, but
    ens authorized to sell at public or private sale
    in *Rayaondvllle,or elsov&ere,  UlthOUt deaund
    ror.yerrormanos*;there was no reguimuuent,ex-
    ;rreeuor by nac~ssary i5pllC6tiOn,thatnotics
    of Intention to .sellbe given the mcrtgngor prior
    to sale. It was provided in the mortgage that
    the mortgegee 'nay purchase at auoh sale in tie
    onms rammer, and to the baas eifeot, es any per-
    eon not interestedhers&a.*
    *The rule goverslng sales under roreeloauro
    upon perscual property 18 that the power to rore-
    0106s through ssle8, other than under court crder',
    is pursly contraotual.0 Tex. fur. p. 189 Su~seo. 05."
    ,It is the oplnlor~of thin departsect,therefore,
    that where the mortpgs by its torah allows the sortga&ee tc
    bedome a purchaser et e priveta foreclosuresale that he may
    80 purchase the reposssasodproperty.        In ,the foreolosurs
    under the terse of a 5ortMe     it is neoossarp that the ssm
    be striotly ccsplled with. Thla is the holding ct the Corn-
    aiseion of Appeals of Texas in the aase of Piramen*s Fucd
    Insurance Cc. v. Wleon, ES4 S. pi.980. The Court held that
    in CLcase whem sele wa8 s&a under the ten&s of the scrt-
    gage end such tenss were not colrpliedwith the same was void
    cud thet the p9roheser ao%ut~rod  uo ri&ts either ~~~~~~
    equlteblo in the property by meana of the sale.
    advised, however, thet In aaee the tams of the mortgage are
    oom,72iedwith end under the ;nort$ayethe aort~;oges1% eutaorlsed
    to be a purchaser   that ho mey so purchasle    the yroperty
    and set legal tit.10to the name, nnd you would be authorized
    to iesue a Certificateof Title la such slortgapgee'e      116LIpe.
    Certainlyan express yrovislon in the aortgage suah a8 was
    oonteinad in the mort&age in the Cs5pbel.lcaseto the sffeot
    that the mortgagee dould be ths purohane: at the private
    'foreclosuresale oould be sutfioiont to autt;orlzehis pur-
    ohme of'the motox vst.ialeof such sals. 6n the other hand,
    if the mortgage was silent on this prcpcsitioo,but merely
    provided th;stthe raortgagee05~14 sell the property at a
    piivate esle, it is cur opinion that l2.eecurts would say
    in sac.9a ease that it was conLem;,latedbtitweenthe jzaarticla
    ti;the mortgage thst th? sale would be mada to a'third zarty
    not th(lmortgagae. In suck a ease the sale by the aortgagee
    would be V4IU. AS tc ghethar or sot Other word-
    t.4iils!aelf
    ing of a testicularmortgage is s\ichtinto ahw the parties
    reasonably 6onteapla~t.Uthat the mortgage6 might jmrohase
    at the private aals wo.Al depend in each ua6e 00 the language
    used.
    Tkle'rals OS lmw was ahaouhced Ln the cram of Clark
    v. Ztudebaker Corporationor America, 171 K. k. 608, a8 fol-
    lows:
    -... . Ths mortgage by its terms &ave the
    moftgagee the right to take poansseionof tha
    mwtgaged oar and aoll it at private sale with-
    out riotice,and also provided t&t the mortgagee
    could beowe ttiepurebe~nr at such asle. It ro1-
    lnws th--1; ii the mortgagee or an agent of the mprt-
    gag**,  or  anyone    also),bought it at:auoh uale, the
    sale would be valid and the purchaser would get a
    ~good
    '.    title. ~. . .*
    Far your further lhfor-matioa      we call your attontlon
    to the ~mse of Tidslity Union Fire iaSuv@fkCe         CO. v. BallW-
    gattsrfieldCo., 10 9. 3. (Zd) 165. in this cam the plain-
    tiff aold a motor vnhiele t4 an indlvldualnamed Barber. Bar?
    bat then sxscuted aartaln natea eeoursd by e mortgage to the
    AutOiQObiha   Fi.n6IlCs  COar~Sny  Of ~lVeOtOn.    The plaintifr en-
    uossed and 'guarantaedtbe jmymeat or raid notee to saSd fl-
    name company. ThereafterBarber defaulted in~the payment of
    5ome    of the notas and the finance comyony though its agent
    took possession       of ths oar and by private sale aol~dt&c same
    to the xlaintitf. ;cnholding 5uOt; a sale valid, ths Court
    etated aa followa:
    "Tha ckattel mortgeage whioh Barber em-
    outed uutharized tha mortgagee in ease of do-
    fault to repossess tx c:r and sell it at pub-
    lic or prlvatpr nc4l.e. mie 00iirt*5 rinsings in-
    cori;orafedin the ju:gmunt dro to the affect
    that the sale wss privetaiymade in accordance
    with t&s ternr, or t&e snO~qp3. The avidezma
    laustefm this finUi~&, and tha legal effect of
    tke sale waa to Yeat a~pollws with the sole and
    unc4adltionaltitle to the yroperty."
    You zra, thorafota,sdrrfsedthat In sUoh a situ+
    b 6uthorlzsd tu laaue 6 Cartlfi-
    tio3 your dspartaknt wR4uli'
    cate ot Title fwitha ziotorY-fdcls in the name of the plrctmser
    at suei: t~orerloauresale.
    Your8 vary truly
    OF TE&&S
    

Document Info

Docket Number: O-2151

Judges: Gerald Mann

Filed Date: 7/2/1940

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017