Legal Opinion

Bendish v. Castillo

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided February 17, 2012No. 20110122PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KAPSNER, Justice.

[¶ 1] Cendak Development Corporation and Fort Rice Bar & Grill, Inc. (“Cen-dak”), appeal from a judgment entered in favor of Richard and Mary Bendish, canceling Bendishes’ contract for deed with James Castillo and holding Cendak had no right to redeem the property under a lease purchase agreement. We affirm, concluding the district court did not abuse its discretion in not granting Cendak a right to redeem the property.

I

[¶ 2] This is an action to cancel a contract for deed. In 2003, Bendishes owned land in Fort Rice, North Dakota, where they operated a business called the…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Continental Casualty Co. v. KinseyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1993
  2. National Bank of Harvey v. International Harvester Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1988
  3. Johnson v. HovlandNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2011
  4. Johnson v. HovlandNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2011
  5. Bender v. LiebeltNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1981

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Bakken v. DuchscherNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2013
  2. Blasi v. Bruin E&P PartnersNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2021
  3. Johnson v. MarkNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2013
  4. Hillerson v. Bismarck Public SchoolsNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2013
  5. In re Racing Servs., Inc.United States Bankruptcy Court, D. North Dakota · 2018

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API