Mills v. Nashua Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
1Opinion of the CourtBois, J.
In this case of first impression we are asked to decide whether a due-on-sale clause contained in a mortgage instrument constitutes a per se unreasonable restraint on alienation or whether the manner in which it was applied amounted to an unreasonable restraint on alienation. In both instances we answer in the negative and, therefore, affirm the result below.
On February 18, 1977, the plaintiffs purchased certain property in Nashua from William L. and Theresa M. Dube, giving a first mortgage to the defendant bank in the amount of $32,800 at an interest rate of 10-3/4 percent per year. At that…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Wellenkamp v. Bank of AmericaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
- Malouff v. Midland Federal Savings and Loan Ass'nSupreme Court of Colorado · 1973
- Occidental Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Venco PartnershipNebraska Supreme Court · 1980
- Gunther v. WhiteTennessee Supreme Court · 1973
- Williams v. First Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n of ArlingtonCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1981
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- Sonny Arnold, Inc. v. Sentry Savings Ass'nTexas Supreme Court · 1982
- Tsadilas v. Providian National BankAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
- Olean v. TregliaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. KoshySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2010
- Schaefer v. IndyMac Mortgage ServicesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2013
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.