2009 WI App 149
court of appeals of
published opinion
Case No.: |
2008AP2533 |
|
Complete Title of Case: |
†Petition For Review Filed |
Opinion Filed: |
September 9, 2009 |
Submitted on Briefs: |
May 11, 2009 |
|
|
JUDGES: |
Brown, C.J., Anderson and Snyder, JJ. |
Concurred: |
|
Dissented: |
|
|
|
Appellant |
|
ATTORNEYS: |
On behalf of the plaintiff-appellant, the cause was
submitted on the briefs of David C. Williams of Harrison, Williams, McDonell & Swatek, LLP, |
|
|
Respondent |
|
ATTORNEYS: |
On behalf of the defendant-third-party-plaintiff-respondent,
the cause was submitted on the brief of Richard Scholze of Konicek, Kaiser, Scholze, |
|
|
2009 WI App 149
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED September 9, 2009 David
R. Schanker Clerk of Court of Appeals |
|
NOTICE |
|
|
This opinion is subject to further editing. If published, the official version will appear in the bound volume of the Official Reports. A party may file with the Supreme Court a petition to review an adverse decision by the Court of Appeals. See Wis. Stat. § 808.10 and Rule 809.62. |
|
Appeal No. |
|
|||
STATE OF |
IN COURT OF APPEALS |
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
Lowell Management Services, Inc.,
Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Defendant, Security Bank of
Defendant-Third-Party
Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Geneva National Community Association, Inc., National Condominium Master Association, Inc. and Paloma Third-Party
Defendants. |
||||
|
|
|||
APPEAL
from a judgment of the circuit court for
Before Brown, C.J., Anderson and Snyder, JJ.
¶1
May 9, 2005. Geneva National defaulted
and
¶2 Under Wis. Stat. § 779.01(4) (2007-08),[1] a construction lien has priority if visible construction started before a mortgage was recorded. However, there is an exception under Wis. Stat. § 706.11(1), which states in relevant part:
706.11 Priority
of certain mortgages, trust funds.
(1) Except as provided in sub. (4), when any of the following mortgages has
been duly recorded, it shall have priority over all liens upon the mortgaged
premises and the buildings and improvements thereon, except tax and special
assessment liens filed after the recording of such mortgage and except liens
under ss. 292.31 (8)(i) and 292.81:
.…
(d) Any mortgage executed to a state or national bank or to a state or federally chartered credit union.
¶3 The trial court properly relied on this exception for its
ruling in favor of Security Bank.
¶4 We begin with
¶5 The trial court reasoned that the purpose of the statutory exception was
to encourage banks to loan money to developers and
people who are going to do construction work.
That was the object of the State of
.…
And my ruling is, that clearly, on its face, [Wis. Stat.
§] 706.11(1)(d) makes an exception to the priority of construction liens
by giving that priority to certain financial institutions to encourage them to
lend, and among those are state banks.
¶6 Statutory interpretation is a question of law. State v. Stenklyft, 2005 WI 71, ¶7,
281
¶7 We agree with Security Bank’s position and, accordingly,
affirm the trial court’s reasoned interpretation of the statute. While it is true that Wis. Stat. § 706.11(1) does not explicitly define “state
bank,” we interpret statutory language in context, “not in isolation but as
part of a whole; in relation to the language of surrounding or closely-related
statutes; and reasonably, to avoid absurd or unreasonable results.” Kalal, 271
¶8 Looking to context, we note several signifiers as to
legislative intent. First the
legislature did not define “state bank” in Wis.
Stat. § 706.11; it did not capitalize “state” as it likely would
have done with a defined term, and it did not employ any restrictive
language. Second, other subsections of
§ 706.11 demonstrate legislative awareness as to how to limit a definition
to
¶9 We now turn to
By the Court.—Judgment affirmed.
[1] All references to the Wisconsin Statutes are to the 2007-08 version unless otherwise noted.
[2]
(1) If the plaintiff recovers the judgment shall describe the mortgaged premises and fix the amount of the mortgage debt then due and also the amount of each installment thereafter to become due, and the time when it will become due, and whether the mortgaged premises can be sold in parcels and whether any part thereof is a homestead, and shall adjudge that the mortgaged premises be sold for the payment of the amount then due and of all installments which shall become due before the sale, or so much thereof as may be sold separately without material injury to the parties interested, and be sufficient to pay such principal, interest and costs; and when demanded in the complaint, direct that judgment shall be rendered for any deficiency against the parties personally liable and, if the sale is to be by referee, the referee must be named therein.