(a) SBA makes loans and provides other services that are authorized and executed under Federal programs to achieve national purposes.
(b) The following are construed and enforced in accordance with Federal law—
(1) Instruments evidencing loans;
(2) Security interests in real or personal property payable to or held by SBA or the Administrator such as promissory notes, bonds, guarantee agreements, mortgages, and deeds of trust;
(3) Other evidences of debt or security;
(4) Contracts or agreements to which SBA is a party, unless expressly provided otherwise.
(c) To the extent feasible, SBA uses local or state procedures, especially for recordation and notification purposes, in implementing and facilitating SBA's loan programs. This use of local or state procedures is not a waiver by SBA of any Federal immunity from any local or state control, penalty, tax, or liability.
(d) No person, corporation, or organization that applies for and receives any benefit or assistance from SBA, or that offers any assurance or security upon which SBA relies for the granting of such benefit or assistance, is entitled to claim or assert any local or state law to defeat the obligation incurred in obtaining or assuring such Federal benefit or assistance.
Notes of Decisions
Stephens v. Lpp Mortg., Ltd., 316 S.W.3d 742 (Tex. App. 2010).
· cites it 2× “§ 2415 (c); 13 C.F.R. § 101.106 (d). This protection is part of the SBA’s “bundle of rights” immediately upon the instrument’s execution.”
LPP Mortg., Ltd. v. Sugarman, 565 F.3d 28 (1st Cir. 2009).
“Because the guaranty is a contract between a private party and an agency of the United States, it appears likely that federal common law governs as to contractual issues, 13 C.F.R. § 101.106 (b)(2) (2009), borrowing from state law where appropriate and consistent with federal…”
Geltzer v. Mooney (In Re MacMenamin's Grill Ltd.), 450 B.R. 414 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2011).
“It contends that because the loan was a Small Business Administration guaranteed loan, with the SBA in some measure being the real economic party in interest, 13 C.F.R. § 101.106 (d) (the “Regulation”) precludes avoidance of the loan and security interest.”
LPP Mortg. Ltd. v. Vasicek, 227 F. Supp. 2d 1108 (D.N.D. 2002).
· cites it 2× “Notwithstanding the Court’s holding that an administrative regulation may not confer jurisdiction, the Court will examine 13 C.F.R. § 101.106 , the provision of the C.”
Pramco, LLC. v. Torres, 286 F. Supp. 2d 164 (D.P.R. 2003).
“” 13 C.F.R. § 101.106 . As for SBA’s policies concerning the liquidation of collateral and the sale of business loans, 13 C.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.