Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=2166656
 
 

References (71)



 
 

Footnotes (8)



 


 



How Do Case Law and Statute Differ? Lessons from the Evolution of Mortgage Law


Andra C. Ghent


Arizona State University (ASU) - Finance Department

June 16, 2014


Abstract:     
This paper traces the history of mortgage law in the US. I explore the history of foreclosure procedures, redemption periods, restrictions on deficiency judgments, and foreclosure moratoria. The historical record shows that the most enduring aspects of mortgage law stem from case law rather than statute. In particular, the ability of creditors to foreclose nonjudicially is determined very early in states’ histories, usually before the US civil war, and usually in case law. In contrast, the aspects of mortgage law developed through statute change more frequently. This finding calls into question whether common law is inherently more flexible than the civil law system used in some other countries. However, case law tends to be less responsive to populist pressures than statute. My findings suggest that the reason common law favors financial development is unlikely to be its greater flexibility relative to law made by statute.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 47

Keywords: Foreclosure Law; Financial History; Common Law; Statute; Civil Law; Creditor Rights

JEL Classification: G18, G21, K11, K28, N20

working papers series


Download This Paper

Date posted: October 25, 2012 ; Last revised: June 17, 2014

Suggested Citation

Ghent, Andra C., How Do Case Law and Statute Differ? Lessons from the Evolution of Mortgage Law (June 16, 2014). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2166656 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2166656

Contact Information

Andra C. Ghent (Contact Author)
Arizona State University (ASU) - Finance Department ( email )
W. P. Carey School of Business
PO Box 873906
Tempe, AZ 85287-3906
United States
HOME PAGE: http://www.public.asu.edu/~aghent/
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 1,271
Downloads: 338
Download Rank: 49,139
References:  71
Footnotes:  8

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo6 in 0.344 seconds