Mississippi Code
Miss. Code Ann. § 15-1-23 (2026)
Limitations applicable to suits or actions on installment notes following foreclosure or sale of property pledged as security therefor
✓ current as of July 2026
In all cases, no suit or action shall hereafter be commenced or brought upon any installment note, or series of notes of three or more, whether due or not, where said note or notes are secured by mortgage, deed of trust, or otherwise, upon any property, real or personal, unless the same is commenced or brought within one year from the date of the foreclosure or sale of the property pledged as security for said note or notes.
Codes, 1942, § 720; Laws, 1934, ch. 251.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1978–2026 · leading case: First Nat. Bank of Columbus v. Drummond, 419 So. 2d 154 (Miss. 1982).
First Nat. Bank of Columbus v. Drummond, 419 So. 2d 154 (Miss. 1982). “, Section 15-1-23 (1972) controlled in this cause and that the action was barred because it was filed more than one year after the foreclosure proceeding.”
Hubbard v. Bancorpsouth Bank, 135 So. 3d 882 (Miss. 2014). “See Miss.Code Ann. § 15-1-23 (Rev.2012). The appropriate statute of limitations for actions on promissory notes by a nonforeclosing party is six years, pursuant to Section 75-3-118.”
Rankin Cnty. Bank v. McKinion, 531 So. 2d 822 (Miss. 1988). “The Lower Court Erred in Finding that the Promissory Note Upon Which the Appellant’s Complaint was Based was an Installment Note within the Meaning of Miss.Code Ann. § 15-1-23 (1972), Annotated as Amended.”
Davis v. Clement, 468 So. 2d 58 (Miss. 1985). “The rule is well settled that both the quality and quantity of possessory acts necessary to establish a claim under Section 15-1-23 may vary with the characteristics of the land.”
Gulf Nat. Bank v. King, 362 So. 2d 1253 (Miss. 1978). “" The defendants each filed an answer and set forth separately in each answer the defense that the cause of action was barred by the one year statute of limitations contained in section 15-1-23 Mississippi Code Annotated (1972).”
Morton v. Resolution Trust Corp., 918 F. Supp. 985 (S.D. Miss. 1995). “The Mortons also argue that any attempt by RTC to claim any purported deficiency is barred by Mississippi’s one-year statute of limitations applicable, to suits or actions on installment notes following foreclosure of property pledged as security for the note — Miss.Code Ann. §…”
Holliman v. Charles L. Cherry & Assoc., 569 So. 2d 1139 (Miss. 1990). “1985), in which this Court held: The rule is well settled that both the quality and quantity of possessory acts necessary to establish a claim under § 15-1-23 may vary with the characteristics of the land.”
United States v. McReynolds, 628 F. Supp. 76 (N.D. Miss. 1986). “2 In his response to plaintiff’s motion and in his cross-motion for summary judgment, defendant asserts that the statute of limitations provided by Miss.Code Ann. § 15-1-23 (1972), and not by 28 U.”
Milam v. Massey-Ferguson, Inc., 580 F. Supp. 879 (S.D. Miss. 1984). “§ 15-1-23 (1972). The Defendant argues that its counterclaim filed under the provisions of Rule 13(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure should relate back to the filing of its original answer under the provisions of Rule 15(c).”
Brent Hubbard v. BancorpSouth Bank (Miss. 2013). “Section 15-1-23 states: In all cases, no suit or action shall hereafter be commenced or brought upon any installment note, or series of notes of three or more, whether due or not, where said note or notes are secured by mortgage, deed of trust, or otherwise, upon any property,…”
Joe Clyde Tubwell v. FV-1, Inc., In Trust for Morgan Stanley Mortg. Capital Holdings, LLC, Morgan Stanley Mortg. Capital Holdings, LLC & Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC (Miss. Ct. App. 2023). “He argues that the court should not have permitted Plaintiffs to pursue their claim because Mississippi Code Annotated section 15-1-23 (Rev. 2019) delineates a one-year limitations period that he alleges is applicable and restricts Plaintiffs’ ability to pursue any issue of…”
Com. Agency v. Loe, 667 F. Supp. 359 (S.D. Miss. 1987). “In support of his motion for summary judgment, defendant Loe contends that plaintiffs suit is time-barred by the Mississippi one-year statute of limitations applicable to deficiencies on installment notes secured by personal property, Miss. Code Ann. § 15-1-23 (1972). TCA…”
— Miss. Code Ann. § 15-1-23(a) — 1 case
Linville (S.D. Miss. 2026).
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.