Case Name: STATE OF OREGON, Acting by and through the DIRECTOR OF VETERANS' AFFAIRS, Respondent, v. HEARN et ux, Appellants
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1984-01-11
Citations: 66 Or. App. 490
Docket Number: 43932; CA A26432
Parties: STATE OF OREGON, Acting by and through the DIRECTOR OF VETERANS’ AFFAIRS, Respondent, v. HEARN et ux, Appellants.
Judges: Before Buttler, Presiding Judge, and Warren and Rossman, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 66
Pages: 490–491

Head Matter:
Argued and submitted November 9, 1983,
affirmed in part; remanded in part January 11, 1984
STATE OF OREGON, Acting by and through the DIRECTOR OF VETERANS’ AFFAIRS, Respondent, v. HEARN et ux, Appellants.
(43932; CA A26432)
674 P2d 94
Charles R. Markley, Portland, argued the cause for appellants. With him on the briefs were Mildred J. Carmack and Schwabe, Williamson, Wyatt, Moore & Roberts, Portland.
Christine L. Dickey, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief were Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, and James E. Mountain, Jr., Solicitor General, Salem.
Before Buttler, Presiding Judge, and Warren and Rossman, Judges.
PER CURIAM

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
Plaintiff brought this foreclosure action, contending that defendants were in default of a condition of their state veterans' home loan mortgage by failing to occupy the mortgaged property as their principal residence. The trial court found that defendants were in default, entered a decree of foreclosure and awarded plaintiff judgment for $42,500, plus accrued interest at 6.2 percent per annum, $193 for the cost of a title search and various sums for taxes and the cost of mortgage cancellation life insurance premiums.
Defendants appeal, contending that the evidence does not support a finding of default and that, in any event, the amount of the judgment is not supported by the pleadings or the evidence. Although we conclude that the record shows defendants to have defaulted, we agree that the amount of the judgment is not supported by the record. Plaintiff concedes that the judgment should be modified. We cannot determine with any degree of certainty the proper amount for which judgment should be entered. Accordingly, we remand for further proceedings limited to that determination.
Determination of default affirmed; remanded to determine amount of judgment.