Legal Opinion

Davis v. Davis

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided March 31, 1972No. 43324-5PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Otis, Justice.

The issue raised by this appeal is whether an acceleration clause in a mortgage requires the mortgagor to tender the entire principal' balance in order to reinstate the mortgage under Minn. St. 580.30. The trial court held such tender necessary and we reverse.

The parties have stipulated to the facts. Two mortgages are involved, in both of which plaintiffs, Emery Davis and Clarice Davis, are mortgagors. In the mortgage executed in 1958, Burton F. Davis, now deceased and succeeded by Melba E. Davis, executrix, was mortgagee. In the mortgage executed in 1967, Loren L. Davis, now…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Graf v. Hope Building Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1930
  2. Needles v. KeysSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1921
  3. UNITED BENEFIT LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY v. HolmanNebraska Supreme Court · 1964
  4. Crawford v. HouserNebraska Supreme Court · 1926
  5. Metropolitan Building & Loan Ass'n v. WeinbergerNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1937

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. First Trust Co., Inc. v. LeibmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
  2. State Farm Life Insurance v. Pyare Square Corp.Court of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1983
  3. First Trust Co., Inc. v. LeibmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
  4. First Trust Co., Inc. v. LeibmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
  5. In re Norwest Bank Metrowest National Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1986

4 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