19S-MF-530 | Febru of 10 Rush, Chief Justice. 18A-MF-808 Opinion by Chief Justice Rush Justices David, Massa, Slaughter, and Goff concur.
D’Amour, Judge On Petition to Transfer from the Indiana Court of Appeals, No. 19S-MF-530 Dean Blair and Paula Blair, Appellants/Cross-Appellees (Defendants) –v– EMC Mortgage, LLC, Appellee/Cross-Appellant (Plaintiff) Argued: Novem| Decided: FebruAppeal from the Vanderburgh Superior Court, No. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) imposing additional, judicially-created time constraints upon a lender's ability to bring a claim on a closed installment contract is not necessary (2) two statutes of limitations apply to a cause of action upon a promissory note and (3) Lender sued within the applicable statutes of limitations.įILED Feb 17 2020, 11:46 am CLERK Indiana Supreme Court Court of Appeals and Tax Court IN THE Indiana Supreme Court Supreme Court Case No. Borrowers in this case asked the Supreme Court to impose an additional rule of reasonableness. Lawsuits to enforce obligations under closed installment contracts are subject to multiple statutes of limitations.
#Emc mortagage trial#
The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the trial court foreclosing a mortgage but finding that Lender was entitled to recover only payments and interest that accrued after a certain date due to Indiana's six-year statute of limitations to bring an action on the note underlying a mortgage, holding that there is no need to judicially create additional time constraints on a lender's ability to bring an action upon a closed installment contract.
0 kommentar(er)
