Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Shutze v. Credithrift of America, Inc.

Mississippi Supreme Court
607 So. 2d 55 (1992)


Facts

Hobart and Georgia Gentry owned a home subject to a mortgage held by Deposit Guaranty Mortgage Company (Deposit Guaranty). In April 1981, in exchange for a home-equity loan of $23,679.36, the Gentrys mortgaged the home for a second time with Credithrift of America, Inc. (Credithrift) (defendant). A deed of trust was executed and recorded, conveying a security interest in the Gentrys’ home to Credithrift. The deed included a dragnet clause, which provided that the conveyance covered all future advances to the Gentrys and secured all present and future debts of the Gentrys. Thereafter, a judgment in the amount of $4,541.78 was entered against the Gentrys in favor of Thomas Shutze (plaintiff), who had entered into a previous business relationship with the Gentrys. Shutze’s judgment was recorded and thereby perfected in October 1984. In 1985, pursuant to the 1981 dragnet clause, the Gentrys renewed the loan with Credithrift and received an advance of $2,784.13. The Gentrys eventually defaulted on the loan payments and left the state. Credithrift foreclosed on the home. Subsequently, Credithrift and Schutze entered into litigation in chancery court, each claiming an interest in the Gentrys’ home. The parties did not dispute that Deposit Guaranty’s first mortgage took priority. However, Shutze argued that his perfected judgment lien had priority over Credithrift’s later-in-time advance to the Gentrys. The chancery court ruled in favor of Credithrift, holding that Shutze’s judgment lien lacked priority and was extinguished by the foreclosure. Shutze appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Robertson, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 176,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.