Court Opinion

ID: 9677738
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 05:58:24.052694+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:58.093173
License: Public Domain

ROBERTSON, Justice,
dissenting.
The majority distinguishes the Smart and Wood cases on, what appears to me to be, a hypertechnical view of the law. In those cases the supreme court held that a mortgagee cannot recover against a mortgagor under equitable subrogation when the parties contract was non-recourse and the contract prescribed that payments by the mortgagee for delinquent taxes would be rolled into the mortgage indebtedness. To hold that BW Village can avoid the Smart and Wood rule by waiting for a judgment against Tricon and then obtaining an assignment, rather than paying the taxes before judgment, is too technical. It seems to me to be distinction without a difference.
I respectfully dissent.