John Marshall Harlan II,
United States v. Shimer — Opinion of the Court
“ The only risk of loss with which Excelsior would have been faced was the risk of having on its hands a property worth less than $9,000 to secure a residual debt of $9,000 (after the United States had paid $4,000 of the total debt of $13,000) . This is precisely the risk which Excelsior would have had to assume had it insisted upon a $4,000 down payment by the veteran and lent $9,000 on the property. ”
John Marshall Harlan II,
United States v. Shimer — Opinion of the Court
“ It is doubtless true that the policy of the Act is, broadly stated, to enable veterans to obtain loans and to obtain them with the least risk of loss upon foreclosure, to both veteran and the Veterans' Administration as guarantor of the veteran's indebtedness, and it is equally clear that had the Regulations adopted or included the provisions of the Pennsylvania Deficiency Judgment Act this would have furthered at least the second of these purposes. ”
John Marshall Harlan II,
United States v. Shimer — Opinion of the Court
“ The additional cost is that required in every case to litigate the value of the mortgaged property. The additional risk is that, if it was judicially determined that the property was worth more than the amount for which the mortgagee could in fact sell it, the mortgagee would have to absorb the cost of the judicial error and could recover on its guaranty only the difference between the unpaid debt and the amount of the judicial estimate of the value of the property. ”
