Alabama Supreme Court Changes Course On Validity of Future-Advance Mortgages

Balch & Bingham LLP
Contact

In September 2018, the Alabama Supreme Court issued an opinion in GHB Constr. and Dev. Co., Inc. v. West Alabama Bank and Trust, No. 1170484, that caused considerable concern for Alabama lenders. The Court held that future-advance mortgages do not come into existence until funds are actually advanced regardless of when the mortgage was recorded. Last Friday, the Alabama Supreme Court reversed its September 2018 opinion and held that the priority of a future-advance mortgage is based on the date of recording, not when the lender advances funds. A link to the March 2019 decision can be located here. This decision should ease the uncertainty created by the Court’s September 2018 decision.

In GHB Construction, Penny Guin hired GHB Construction & Development Co. Inc. to build a house. To finance the construction, she entered into a future-advance mortgage with West Alabama Bank and Trust. The mortgage was recorded only a few days after it was signed. Several months later, GHB began construction. West Alabama did not actually advance any funds until several months after that.

Later, GHB then sought a declaration that its materialman’s lien had priority over West Alabama’s mortgage.  GHB’s theory was that it had started work before West Alabama made any advances and, therefore, its lien should have priority. The trial court granted West Alabama’s motion to dismiss and GHB appealed.

In its original opinion released in September 2018, the Alabama Supreme Court reversed, holding that West Alabama’s mortgage had not come into existence until the first advance was made. Because that was after GHB had started work on the house, GHB’s materialman’s lien had priority. On application for rehearing, the Court withdrew its original opinion reversing the trial court and affirmed. The Court reasoned that, under Alabama Code § 35-4-34, a mortgage does not require consideration to be legally valid. As such, West Alabama’s mortgage was valid the date it executed and obtained priority upon recording. Because that date was prior to the start of construction, West Alabama’s mortgage had priority over the materialman’s lien.

The Alabama Bankers Association, Alabama Land Title Association, the League of Southeastern Credit Unions & Affiliates, the Mortgage Bankers Association of Alabama, Inc., and the Credit Union Coalition of Alabama filed a joint amicus brief in support of rehearing.

 

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Balch & Bingham LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Balch & Bingham LLP
Contact
more
less

Balch & Bingham LLP on:

Reporters on Deadline

Related Case Law

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide

This website uses cookies to improve user experience, track anonymous site usage, store authorization tokens and permit sharing on social media networks. By continuing to browse this website you accept the use of cookies. Click here to read more about how we use cookies.