We find some degree of disagreement in the more recent Illinois cases, even from the same district, on the appropriate application of the Horney considerations. In Landino v. American National Bank of South Chicago Heights, 120 Ill. App.3d 740, 76 Ill.Dec. 416, 458 N.E.2d 1070 (1st Dist. 1983), the court, strictly construing Horney and following Quinn, held that all four requirements must be met before an assignment of a beneficial interest in a land trust will be deemed to have resulted in a security interest in personal property; the Landino court found that all tests had not been passed and that an equitable mortgage with the attendant right of redemption had been created. A year later in Melrose Park National Bank v. Melrose Park National Bank, as Trustee, 123 Ill.App.3d 19, 78 Ill.Dec. 622, 462 N.E.2d 741 (1st Dist. 1984), the court, in a thorough analysis of Illinois law, disagreed that all four Horney considerations had to be found to exist before a personal property security interest could be recognized.

The final factor in the court's assessment, and the factor upon which it distinguished its earlier holding in De Voigne was that the trust agreement in Horney did not provide for the sale of the real estate upon default. Subsequent cases have generally followed the court's holding in Horney, to find that security interests in the beneficial interests in land trusts are personal property interests rather than equitable mortgages. (See Melrose Park National Bank v. Melrose Park National Bank (1984), 123 Ill. App.3d 282, 287, 462 N.E.2d 741, and cases cited therein; contra, Landino v. American National Bank (1983), 120 Ill. App.3d 740, 458 N.E.2d 1070.) Most recently, the court in Melrose, after a thorough analysis of the applicable law, stated its belief that all four of the considerations set forth in Horney were not meant to be hard and fast "tests," but merely guidelines which may be used to garner the intent of the parties from the trust instruments. ( Melrose Park National Bank v. Melrose Park National Bank (1984), 123 Ill. App.3d 282, 288, 462 N.E.2d 741; accord, Capital Bank Trust v. Fascetta (7th Cir. 1985), 771 F.2d 1077.)

In the cases coming after DeVoigne and Horney, the courts have generally followed the Horney holding to find that security interests in land trust beneficial interests are personal property interests rather than equitable mortgages. (See, e.g., In re Estate of Alpert (1983), 95 Ill.2d 377, 447 N.E.2d 796; First Federal Savings Loan Association v. Pogue (1979), 72 Ill. App.3d 54, 389 N.E.2d 652; Shefner v. University National Bank (1976), 40 Ill. App.3d 978, 353 N.E.2d 126; Quinn v. Pullman Trust Savings Bank (1968), 98 Ill. App.2d 402, 240 N.E.2d 791; Lawn Savings Loan Association v. Quinn (1967), 81 Ill. App.2d 304, 225 N.E.2d 683; Lindberg, Assignments of Beneficial Interests in Illinois Land Trusts as Security for a Debt, 70 Ill. B.J. 576, 579-80 (1982); contra, Landino v. AmericanNational Bank (1983), 120 Ill. App.3d 740.)