Opinion ID: 1142462
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: whether first columbus could determine the amount of indebtedness owed on the parcel of property on which the loss occurred creating a genuine issue of material fact.

Text: Based upon the policy and the statutory language, National Farmers must pay First Columbus for loss or damage under the policy as interest may appear. Again, the starting point for this Court is the language of the policy itself and the statute. The relevant subsection of the insurance policy reads as follows: We will pay for covered loss of or damage to buildings or structures to each mortgage holder shown in the Declarations in their order of precedence, as interests may appear. (emphasis added) The relevant portion of the statute reads as follows: Loss or damage, if any, under this policy, shall be payable to ... mortgagee (or trustee), as ... interest may appear. Miss. Code Ann. § 83-13-9 (1972) (emphasis added). Thus, in order for National Farmers to pay First Columbus under the policy, it must first determine what First Columbus' interest is under the policy. This Court has previously ascertained what the phrase as interest may appear means under Miss. Code Ann. § 83-13-9. In Weems v. American Sec. Ins. Co., 486 So.2d 1222 (Miss. 1986), this Court held that the interest is a security interest measured in amount by a promissory note secured by the deed of trust. Weems, 486 So.2d at 1229 (emphasis added). Thus, it is the promissory note which defines the interest, not the amount of debt secured by the property. The phrase `as its interest may appear' does not refer to the mortgagee's interest in the property, but to the amount of debt owed to it secured by the mortgage or deed of trust. Couch on Insurance 2d (Rev. ed.) § 42:696 (1982) (emphasis added). National Farmers erroneously asserts that First Columbus must prove its interest in the property. Its contention is that First Columbus is only entitled to the amount of money owed on the property. It is not the amount owed on the property, but the amount of the note that is controlling under this Court's interpretation of the statute. [2] It is apparent that this Court has found the phrase as interest may appear to refer to the actual amount of debt and any interest accrued. Weems, 486 So.2d at 1229. We have determined the interest by aggregating all sums payment of which is secured by the deed of trust. This ... includes interest on the mortgage debt. Id. In the case sub judice it is uncontested that the amount owing on the note is $50,996.21. Therefore, applying the rule stated by this Court in Weems, First Columbus has determined its interest under the policy and no genuine issue of material fact exists. Thus, the lower court appropriately granted summary judgment. All other issues raised on appeal were reviewed by this Court and found to be without merit.