Mertola, LLC v. Santos
Court of Appeals of Arizona
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
JOHNSEN, Judge:
¶ 1 We hold in this case that, absent agreement to the contrary, a cardholder’s failure to make a minimum monthly credit-card payment does not trigger the statute of limitations on a claim for the entire unpaid balance on the account. Absent contrary terms in the account agreement, the lender’s claim for the balance does not accrue, and limitations does not begin to run, until the lender accelerates the debt or otherwise demands payment in full.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
¶ 2 Alberto and Arlene Santos accepted a credit card from Washington Mutual Bank. By the time they…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Gust, Rosenfeld & Henderson v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaArizona Supreme Court · 1995
- Walk v. RingArizona Supreme Court · 2002
- Taylor v. First Resolution Invest. Corp. (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2016
- League of Ariz. Cities and Towns v. MartinArizona Supreme Court · 2009
- Smither v. Asset Acceptance, LLCIndiana Court of Appeals · 2010
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Mertola LLC v. Alberto santos/arlene SantosArizona Supreme Court · 2018