Bank of Bearden v. Simpson
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Opinion of the Court
David Newbern, Justice.
This mortgage foreclosure case presents a question with which we have not previously dealt. If a lender accepts both personalty and realty as collateral for a loan and, upon default, proceeds first against the personalty in a commercially unreasonable manner, how will the remainder of the debt be calculated and what are the lender’s remaining remedies? We hold that if the lender is unable to show that market value or more was obtained for the personalty sold, a rebuttable presumption arises that the remainder of the debt will be the difference between the market value…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Norton v. Nat. Bank of Commerce of Pine BluffSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1966
- First State Bank v. HallettSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1987
- Wilson v. WilsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1980
- Deason v. Farmers & Merchants BankSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1989
- United States Ex Rel. Farmers Home Administration v. KennedySupreme Court of Georgia · 1986
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- In re PhillipsTexas Supreme Court · 2016
- City National Bank of Fort Smith, Arkansas v. Unique Structures, Inc. Susie ArnallCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1995
- National Bank of Commerce of El Dorado v. McMullan (In Re McMullan)United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1996
- Gonzalez v. Tapia, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District2009
- Prince v. R & T Motors, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arkansas · 1997
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.