Holt v. Citizens Central Bank
Tennessee Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
FONES, Justice.
Plaintiff brought this action to set aside a foreclosure sale on the ground of inadequacy of price so great as to shock the conscience of the court. The trial court found that the inadequate sale price shocked its conscience, but that no irregularity or unfair circumstance was shown and refused to set aside the sale. The Court of Appeals agreed with the trial court’s findings of fact but held that inadequacy of consideration so great as to shock the conscience of the court, standing alone, was sufficient to warrant voiding the sale. We granted defendant’s rule eleven…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Swindell v. OvertonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983
- Jinkins v. ChambersCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1981
- Pugh v. RichmondCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1967
- Wright v. WilsonTennessee Supreme Court · 1829
- Allen v. WaltTennessee Supreme Court · 1872
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- First Bank v. FISCHER & FRICHTEL, INC.Supreme Court of Missouri · 2012
- Orlando Residence, Ltd. v. Nashville Lodging Co.Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 2002
- Citimortgage, Inc. v. Angeline Renee DrakeCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 2013
- Coleman v. Indymac Venture LLCDistrict Court, W.D. Tennessee · 2013
- Cadence Bank, N.A. v. Latting Road Partners, LLCDistrict Court, W.D. Tennessee · 2010
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.