David and Linda are married and purchase a home in Minot, North Dakota using a mortgage loan. They take title as joint tenants. Two years later, David alone signs a mortgage on the property to secure a personal business loan without Linda's knowledge or consent. Under North Dakota law, which of the following best describes the validity and effect of David's unilateral mortgage?

Correct Answer

B) David's mortgage is valid and enforceable against David's individual interest in the joint tenancy, but may not be enforceable against Linda's interest without her consent

North Dakota is a common law (separate property) state, not a community property state. Each co-owner in a joint tenancy holds an individual interest that can generally be encumbered or conveyed independently. David can mortgage his own interest in the joint tenancy without Linda's consent. However, Linda's interest is protected — the lender's lien attaches only to David's undivided interest, and Linda's interest is not encumbered without her signature. If David defaults and the lender forecloses, the foreclosure would sever the joint tenancy as to David's interest, and the lender would become a tenant in common with Linda. North Dakota's non-community-property status is a key exam distinction.