Legal Opinion
Kimura v. Wauford
New Mexico Supreme Court
Decided March 4, 1986No. 15551PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
FEDERICI, Justice.
Tom Kimura, Mary Kimura and Kay Taira (plaintiffs) brought suit against Joe Wauford (defendant) to recover a money judgment based upon default by the defendant under a sales agreement and a promissory note. Prior to bringing suit, upon default by the defendant, the plaintiffs retook possession of the building and equipment which were pledged as collateral under a security agreement. The trial court concluded that pursuant to the Uniform Commercial Code (Code), NMSA 1978, Section 55-9-501 (Cum.Supp.1985) and Section 55-9-503, the plaintiffs were entitled to possession…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Pruske v. National Bank of Commerce of San AntonioCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1976
- Michigan National Bank v. MarstonMichigan Court of Appeals · 1970
- Olsen v. Valley National Bank of AuroraAppellate Court of Illinois · 1968
- Moran v. HolmanAlaska Supreme Court · 1973
- Hubbard v. LagowCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1979
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Lamp Fair, Inc. v. Pedro v. Perez-Ortiz, Lamp Fair, Inc. v. Pedro v. Perez-OrtizCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1989
- McMinn v. MBF Operating, Inc.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 2006
- Spellman v. Independent Bankers' Bank of FloridaDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2014
- Bank One Akron, N.A. v. NobilOhio Court of Appeals · 1992
- Western Bank v. MatherlyNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1987
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.