Legal Opinion

Nydam v. Crawford

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided December 29, 1994No. 1 CA-CV 93-0246PublishedCited by 28 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

FIDEL, Judge.

Plaintiff appeals from summary judgment granted to defendants in her suit to collect an unpaid promissory note. The court ruled that the anti-deficiency statute, Arizona Revised Statutes Annotated section (“A.R.S. §”) 33-814(G), barred the action. 1 Plaintiff contends that the trial court misapplied the statute. We hold that the trial court correctly applied the statute, as interpreted by our supreme court in Baker v. Gardner, 160 Ariz. 98, 770 P.2d 766 (1988).

Defendants did not file an answering brief in this court, which could constitute confession of reversible error.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Ross Realty Co. v. First Citizens Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
  2. Baker v. GardnerArizona Supreme Court · 1989
  3. In Re the Appeal in Pinal County, Juvenile Action No. S-389Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1986

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. MCDOWELL MOUNTAIN RANCH COMMUNITY ASS'N v. SimonsCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2007
  2. In re United States Currency In Amount of $26,980.00Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2000
  3. Roddy v. County of MaricopaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1996
  4. Savord v. MortonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2014
  5. Reeck v. MendozaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2013

23 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