Legal Opinion

Swanson v. Krenik

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided February 11, 1994No. S-5315PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

MOORE, Chief Justice.

This case presents a single legal issue regarding the rights between an original mortgagor/grantor and the first grantee of real property when the second grantee defaults. The superior court ruled that the original mortgagors, the Kreniks, were subsureties and therefore entitled to indemnification from the first grantee, Marie Swanson. On appeal, Swanson argues that she and the Kreniks became cosureties when the second grantees assumed the mortgage obligation. Swanson contends that, as a cosurety, she is entitled to contribution from the Kreniks for a proportionate…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Fluke Capital & Management Services Co. v. RichmondWashington Supreme Court · 1986
  2. Drake v. HosleyAlaska Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Foss Alaska Line, Inc. v. Northland Services, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 1986
  4. Seronick v. LEVY SCHONFELDMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1988
  5. Moss v. McDonaldColorado Court of Appeals · 1988

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Attorney General v. DesiletsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1994
  2. Lowe v. AlbertazzieWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1999
  3. Attorney General v. DesiletsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1994

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

Powered by the Exa API