© 2020 by West-Watt Law, PLC

Disclaimer: This web site is designed for general information only. The information presented at this site should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship.

 

Supreme Court of Arizona update on anti-deficiency laws

August 28, 2012

Today, August 28, 2012, the Supreme Court of Arizona published its Minutes in which it denied the Petition for Review filed by M & I Marshall/Ilsley Bank asking them to reverse the decision of the Arizona Court of Appeals, Division I in M&I Marshall & Ilsley Bank v. Mueller, 228 Ariz. 478, 268 P.3d 1135 (App. 2011).  In the Court of Appeals decision, the Court found that a person building a house for their own residence was protected from a deficiency being sought by their lender after default even though the house was never completed and, therefore, not subject to occupancy.  The case distinguished the prior Mid-Kansas Decision (Mid Kansas Federal Savings and Loan Association of Wichita v. Dynamic Development Corporation, 167 Ariz. 122, 804 P.2d 1310 (1991), which held that a deficiency could be sought when default and non-judicial foreclosure occurred prior to a certificate of occupancy being issued since the property was not capable of being occupied and limited its application to developers not building homes for their own occupancy.

 

In the Mueller case, the Court of Appeals drew the distinction between the owner/builder and commercial developer by emphasizing that “[t]he primary purpose of the Arizona anti-deficiency statutes is to protect ‘homeowners’ from deficiency judgments — not to afford protection to commercial home-builders.”  The decision of the Supreme Court in case CV-12-0019-PR to deny review of the Mueller case gives the Court of Appeals decision the value as precedent that can now be used without restriction in Arizona.  Unless reconsideration of their denial occurs, lenders will likely be much more careful in making construction loans since they will not have the protection of being able to seek a deficiency when a person building a home that they intend to occupy fails to complete the home and defaults on the loan borrowed to build it.

 

 

Please reload

Featured Posts

Proposition 206 or the healthy working family’s initiative passed November 8, 2016 with 59% of Arizonian’s voting yes for the proposition.

Proposition...

Proposition 206 and what it means for your business

January 31, 2020

1/2
Please reload

Recent Posts
Please reload

Archive
Please reload

Search By Tags

I'm busy working on my blog posts. Watch this space!

Please reload

Follow Us
  • Facebook Basic Square
  • Twitter Basic Square
  • Google+ Basic Square