Also known as: owed · owe · owes · due and owing · debt owing
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
An amount or duty that remains unpaid or due to another party. The term identifies an obligation that has not yet been satisfied and that exposes the obligor to liability upon breach.
Oskar Ocampo operated a delivery van without checking his mirrors at an intersection. A pedestrian crossing the street was struck and suffered a broken leg. The court held that the duty owing from Oskar to the pedestrian was breached when he failed to maintain a proper lookout, making him subject to liability for the resulting injuries.
Omar Olson purchased coastal lots intending to build homes. A new state statute barred all construction to protect dunes. Olson sued claiming the regulation left his land valueless. The court examined whether compensation was owing under the Takings Clause given the total deprivation of economic use.
In 1986, petitioner David H. Lucas purchased two residential lots on the Isle of Palms in Charleston County, South Carolina, for $975,000. He intended to construct single-family homes on the parcels, which at the time were zoned for such use and required no building permit for development. No portion of the lots qualified as a critical area under then-existing coastal zone legislation. Subsequently, in 1988, the South Carolina Legislature enacted the Beachfront Management Act. The legislation established a baseline and prohibited construction of occupable improvements seaward of a line drawn 20 feet landward of that baseline, directly affecting Lucas's parcels by barring any permanent habitable structures. Lucas filed an action in the Court of Common Pleas alleging that the Act's restrictions effected a taking of his property without just compensation. Following a bench trial, the court determined that the prohibition rendered the lots valueless and ordered the state to pay just compensation in the amount of $1,232,387.50. The Supreme Court of South Carolina reversed the trial court's judgment. It accepted the legislature's findings that new construction threatened public resources and concluded that a regulation designed to prevent serious public harm could not constitute a taking. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the South Carolina Supreme Court's decision.
View caseOlga O'Neill obtained a final support judgment against her former spouse. The obligor later received trust distributions but failed to pay arrears. The court held that the support amount owing remained enforceable and could be reached despite spendthrift provisions.
Odilia Okamura held a mortgage on land owned by another party. The mortgagor requested disclosure of the current balance. The statement showed the exact amount owing on the secured debt at the time of the request.
Owen Ortega assigned an account receivable to a financing company. The account debtor asserted a preexisting claim against the assignor. The court limited the offset to the amount the debtor still owed on the assigned obligation.
Opal Okoro received a foreclosure notice listing all past-due payments and fees. The notice itemized every charge owing to the creditor as of the date of the notice.
A duty is owing when the actor must conduct himself in a particular manner or face liability to the person affected if the conduct causes legally cognizable injury. The obligation arises from the relationship between the parties and the foreseeable risk created by the actor's conduct.
Compensation is owing when a regulation deprives the owner of all economically beneficial use of the land without advancing a common-law nuisance prevention rationale. The total taking triggers the obligation unless background principles of property law already barred the intended use.
Supporting sources
A general creditor cannot reach distributions when a spendthrift clause is present. Exceptions exist for support claims by former spouses and for certain state or federal claims when a statute expressly authorizes attachment of the distributions.
…The laws challenged in Zablocki and Turner did not define marriage as “the union of a man and a woman, where neither party owes child support or is in prison.” Nor did the interracial marriage ban at issue in Loving define marriage as “the union of a man and a woman of the same race.” See Tragen, Comment,…