Legal Opinion

Ruidoso State Bank v. Castle

New Mexico Supreme Court

Decided December 23, 1986No. 16259PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

WALTERS, Justice.

The question on this appeal is whether a mortgage containing a “dragnet clause” covers preexisting debts to the lender in all cases, whether or not those debts are related to the purpose of the loan for which the mortgage is obtained, to give the lender in a foreclosure proceeding a priority position as to those debts over judgments obtained by other creditors before foreclosure. In the circumstances of this case, we hold it does not and we affirm the trial court. FACTS

Appellant Ruidoso State Bank (Bank) brought a foreclosure suit against Michael Castle and Ruth Castle…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Toltec International, Inc. v. Village of RuidosoNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1980
  2. Clovis National Bank v. HarmonNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1984
  3. Sonia Uransky, as Trustee in Bankruptcy of Dean Barnard v. First Federal Savings & Loan Association of Fort MyersCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1982
  4. In Re BassUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Mexico · 1984
  5. New Mexico Bank & Trust Co. v. Lucas Bros.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1978

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Register v. Roberson Const. Co., Inc.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1987
  2. First National Bank, Cortez v. First Interstate Bank, RivertonWyoming Supreme Court · 1989
  3. First National Bank, Cortez v. First Interstate Bank, RivertonWyoming Supreme Court · 1989

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

Powered by the Exa API