Naumburg v. Pattison
New Mexico Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SOSA, Senior Justice.
Due to defendants’ refusal to accept prepayment on a real estate contract, plaintiffs, relying on the Residential Home Loan Act (RHLA), sought a declaratory judgment, an injunction and damages. Defendants answered and brought a counterclaim seeking recission in the event the trial court declared plaintiffs’ right to prepay. The trial court found that the RHLA did not apply; nevertheless, the court held that plaintiffs were entitled to prepay the contract provided they also pay defendants a reasonable penalty for prepayment. We reverse the trial court except as to…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Zion's Properties, Inc. v. HoltUtah Supreme Court · 1975
- Letha Cantrell Guthrie v. Finis CurnuttCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1969
- Davis v. Commissioner of RevenueNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1971
- Dunn v. LigonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1968
- ACTION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION v. WoodallCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1974
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n v. ShirleyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1996
- Prudential Insurance Co. of America v. Rand & Reed Powers PartnershipDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1997
- Miller v. JohnsonNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1998
- Bank Of America National Trust And Savings Association v. Bobby T. ShirleyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1996
- Naumburg v. PattisonNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1985