Majority
Opinion
Plaintiff appeals from a judgment which awarded
While section 580b of the Code of Civil Procedure prohibits a judgment against a debtor following foreclosure, it does not prevent a creditor from realizing on additional security. (Freedland v. Greco (1955) 45 Cal.2d 462 , 466 [ 289 P.2d 463 ]; Hatch v. Security-First Nat. Bank (1942) 19 Cal.2d 254 , 260-261 [ 120 P.2d 869 ]; Mortgage Guarantee Co. v. Sampsell (1942) 51 Cal.App.2d 180 , 183-186 [ 124 P.2d 353 ]; 3 Witkin, Summary of Cal. Law (8th ed. 1973) Security Transactions in Real Property, § 117, pp. 1585-1587.) Since Imperial held the policy as security for the performance of the trust and was named as a loss payee in the policy, the policy constituted additional security for the debt, and receipt of the insurance proceeds by the mortgagee was not prohibited by section 580b of the Code of Civil Procedure. Contrary to appellant’s contention, the debtor-creditor relationship between the parties was not totally extinguished during the foreclosure proceedings because Imperial purchased the property for less than the amount of the balance due under the deed of trust. (Rosenbaum v. Funcannon (1962) 308 F.2d 680 , 684; cf. Woody v. Lytton Savings & Loan Assn. (1964) 229 Cal.App.2d 641 , 648 [ 40 Cal.Rptr. 560 ]; cf. 5 Couch on Insurance (2d ed.) Mortgagors and Mortgagees as Claimants, § 29:76, pp. 361-362.) Under such circumstances, the mortgagee was entitled to the insurance proceeds up to the amount of the indebtedness remaining after the foreclosure sale. (Duarte v. Lake Gregory Land and Water Co. (1974) 39 Cal.App.3d 101 , 105 [ 113 Cal.Rptr. 893 ]; cf. Woody v. Lytton Savings <6 Loan Assn., supra; Rosenbaum v. Funcannon, supra, at p. 685 ; Hetland, Cal. Real Estate Secured Transactions (Cont. Ed. Bar 1970) Antideficiency Legislation, p. 257; 5 Couch on Insurance (2d ed.) supra, §§ 29:75, 29:76, pp. 360-362.)
The decision of Smith v. Allen (1968) 68 Cal.2d 93 [ 65 Cal.Rptr. 153 , 436 P.2d 65 ], upon which appellant relies, is inapposite to the present case. In Smith v. Allen, the question was whether, following a foreclosure
Judgment affirmed.
Footnotes
- * Before Molinari, P. J., Sims, J„ and Lazarus, J. †
- † † Retired judge of the superior court sitting under assignment by the Chairman of the Judicial Council.
Cases cited
- Freedland v. Greco 45 Cal.2d 462 at 466 p. 50
- Hatch v. Security-First National Bank 19 Cal.2d 254 at 260-261 p. 50
- Mortgage Guarantee Co. v. Sampsell 51 Cal.App.2d 180 at 183-186 p. 50
- Woody v. Lytton Savings & Loan Ass'n 229 Cal.App.2d 641 at 648 p. 50
- Duarte v. Lake Gregory Land & Water Co. 39 Cal.App.3d 101 at 105 p. 50
- Smith v. Allen 68 Cal.2d 93 p. 50