Legal Opinion

Sewell v. Neilsen, Monroe, Inc.

Idaho Court of Appeals

Decided December 13, 1985No. 15386PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WALTERS, Chief Judge.

This is an appeal from a summary judgment granted to the plaintiff, Max Sewell, in an action to collect on a promissory note. We are presented with three questions. First, should the appeal be dismissed for mootness because of partial satisfaction of the judgment through an execution sale and because the appellant agreed to entry of a charging order against a partnership interest held by the appellant, to secure the balance owed on the judgment? Second, was there any unresolved genuine issue of material fact which would preclude summary judgment? Finally, did the district…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Riverside Development Co. v. RitchieIdaho Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Reis v. CoxIdaho Supreme Court · 1982
  3. International Business MacHines Corp. v. LawhornIdaho Court of Appeals · 1984
  4. Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. MarlorSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
  5. Blackmon v. ZufeltIdaho Court of Appeals · 1985

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Farm Credit Bank of Spokane v. StevensonIdaho Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Ponderosa Paint Manufacturing, Inc. v. YackIdaho Court of Appeals · 1994
  3. Sutheimer v. StoltenbergIdaho Court of Appeals · 1995

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

Powered by the Exa API