Community Bank Delaware v. Far East Capital, Inc.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE RICHARD F. STOKES 1 THE CIRCLE, SUITE 2 SUSSEX C OUN TY C OUR THO USE GEOR GETO WN , DE 19947 JUDGE David R. Hackett, Esquire Griffin & Hackett, P.A. 116 W. Market Street P.O. Box 612 Georgetown, DE 19947 Dean A. Campbell, Esquire Law Office of Dean A. Campbell, LLC 401 North Bedford Street P.O. Box 568 Georgetown, DE 19947 RE: Community Bank Delaware v. Far East Capital, Inc. C.A. No. S11L-03-022 RFS Plaintiff s Motion for Summary Judgment. Denied. Defendant s Motion to Dismiss. Granted without Prejudice. Submitted: May 18, 2011 Decided: July 6, 2011 Dear Counsel: Plaintiff Community Bank Delaware has filed a motion for summary judgment seeking to foreclose on two recorded commercial mortgages and a recorded commercial line of credit mortgage. Defendant Far East Capital, Inc. has filed a motion for summary judgment or, in the alternative, a motion to dismiss because the Defendant s corporate Page 1 seal is not affixed to any of the instruments. The record shows that this assertion is accurate, rendering each contract an equitable mortgage, over which the Court of Chancery has exclusive jurisdiction.1 Although the absence of the corporate seal on a commercial mortgage is a technical defect that precludes enforcement at law, this technicality does not render the mortgages invalid or unenforceable in the Court of Chancery.2 The sine qua non of a mortgage is not form, but the parties intention to secure a debt by a pledge of real property. The form of a mortgage is determinative only of the court in which the mortgage may be enforced.3 Pursuant to 10 Del. C. ยง 1902, the Complaint is dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Plaintiff may file an election to transfer in the Court of Chancery within 60 days of this Order becoming final. Defendant s motion to dismiss is GRANTED without prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED. Very truly yours, Richard F. Stokes 1 Handler Construction, Inc. v. Corestates Bank, N.A., 633 A.2d 356, 363 (Del. 1993). 2 Id. 3 Id. Page 2 Original to Prothonotary Page 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
