Summary

Owen J. Roberts Borchard v. California Bank — Opinion of the Court

The court may order rent to be paid by the debtor, may order him to make payments on account of principal, and, in its continuing control over the property, may enter any other orders for the protection of the debtor and secured creditors which the situation requires. Failure of the debtor to comply with any such orders may eventuate in a sale.
Instead of prosecuting the cause before the Conciliation Commissioner pursuant to the debtors' petition, the bank resorted to a procedure not contemplated by the statute, evidently on the theory that it could obtain some advantage by that course.
Source: Wikisource

Owen J. Roberts Borchard v. California Bank — Opinion of the Court

As a prerequisite to an intelligent determination of the terms under which the debtor is to remain in possession, the statute requires that the court and the parties shall be informed of the fair value of the property. As pointed out in the Wright case, supra, the secured creditors' rights are protected to the extent of the value of the property.
Source: Wikisource

Owen J. Roberts Borchard v. California Bank — Opinion of the Court

The precise matter in controversy is whether the bankruptcy court may permit foreclosure of mortgage liens where the procedure prescribed by § 75, sub. s, has not been followed.
The petitioners, husband and wife, are farmers. Over the period January 24, 1927 to June 19, 1933, they borrowed from the respondent, the California Bank, a total of $87,566.93, in varying amounts, executing to the bank their promissory notes for the respective loans together with deeds of trust [2] on their farm real estate as security.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature