Federal Sav. and Loan Ins. Corp. v. Hamilton, 89-348
| Docket Nº | No. 89-348 |
| Citation | 786 P.2d 1190, 241 Mont. 367 |
| Case Date | February 15, 1990 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Montana |
Page 1190
for the Montana Federal Savings Bank, f/k/a
Montana Savings and Loan Association,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
Darwin HAMILTON, Mary Hamilton, et al., Defendants and Appellants.
Decided Feb. 15, 1990.
Page 1191
Patrick M. Springer, Kalispell, for defendants and appellants.
[241 Mont. 368] Debra D. Parker, Murphy, Robinson, Heckathorn & Phillips, Kalispell, for plaintiff and respondent.
WEBER Justice.
This appeal arises from an order by the District Court, Eleventh Judicial District, Flathead County, Montana, granting summary judgment in favor of plaintiff. Defendant appeals. We affirm.
The issues presented for our review are:
1. Did the Hamiltons present a timely appeal of the amended summary judgment?
2. Whether this case should be remanded for a determination of the adequacy of the sales price of land sold at a sheriff's sale.
Mr. and Mrs. Darwin Hamilton purchased property near Kalispell, Montana, in 1982, for development as a mobile home subdivision. The Hamiltons entered an agreement with the owners of the land, Mr. and Mrs. Long, to purchase the property for $250,000. The Longs took a mortgage on the land at this time.
That same year Mr. Hamilton borrowed $175,000 from Montana Savings and Loan Association for development costs. To secure this loan he executed a promissory note on March 16, 1982, and the Association also took a mortgage on the land. This promissory note stated that the note would come due on May 16, 1985. A year later, Mr. Hamilton borrowed an additional $44,000 from Montana Savings and Loan Association, which was used to purchase an additional seven acres adjoining the original property. He executed a promissory note for this amount, due May 16, 1985. At the same time he executed a deed of trust to the Association, naming it as beneficiary. On July 29, 1983, Mr. Hamilton executed a mortgage modification agreement and a promissory note for the additional amount of $144,000. Under this agreement, all three obligations were consolidated into an indebtedness in the amount of $359,000, secured by the mortgage. This agreement stated a due date of August 1, 1984, with a possible twelve month extension under certain conditions. The Hamiltons gave personal guarantees of each promissory note. The mortgage modification also contained an agreement whereby the Longs subordinated their interest in the property to the Association.
Mr. Hamilton began subdividing the property into mobile home lots, calling the subdivision "Green Tree Meadows." Seventeen of these lots were sold to individual parties; however, the development [241 Mont. 369] of the subdivision was not completed by the end of 1985, and the Hamiltons had not satisfied their obligations with the Bank.
Montana Savings and Loan Association became Montana Federal Savings Bank. On August 14, 1985, the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation (FSLIC) was appointed receiver for Montana Federal
Page 1192
Savings Bank. On August 16, 1985, the receiver closed the Savings Bank and began liquidating the assets. On August 28, 1986 FSLIC filed a complaint to foreclose against Darwin and Mary Hamilton, alleging that they were in default under the terms of the three promissory notes, the Mortgage, the Deed of Trust, and the Mortgage Modification Agreement. The complaint stated a total amount owing, including...To continue reading
Request your trial
-
New England Sav. Bank v. Lopez, 14558
...609 (1987), appeal denied, 119 Ill.2d 557, 119 Ill.Dec. 386, 522 N.E.2d 1245 (1988); Federal Savings & Loan Ins. Corporation v. Hamilton, 241 Mont. 367, 786 P.2d 1190 (1990); First Financial Savings Assn. v. Spranger, 156 Wis.2d 440, 456 N.W.2d 897 (1990); see also B. Dunaway, supra, § 14.0......
-
Whitefish Credit Union v. Prindiville, DA 15–0155.
...Galleria I, 239 Mont. at 265, 780 P.2d at 617 (citations omitted).¶ 16 A year later, in Fed. Sav. & Loan Ins. Corp. v. Hamilton, 241 Mont. 367, 786 P.2d 1190 (1990), the debtors argued on appeal that this Court should remand the case for a hearing to determine the adequacy of the sales pric......
-
Trustees of Washington-Idaho-Montana Carpenters-Employers Retirement Trust Fund v. Galleria Partnership, WASHINGTON-IDAHO-MONTANA
...amount bid on real property at a judicial sale is implied by our decision in Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corp. v. Hamilton (1990), 241 Mont. 367, 786 P.2d 1190. We concluded that a mortgagor could not invoke this Court's equity jurisdiction to remand the case for determination of fai......
-
Bank of Baker v. Mikelson Land Co., 98-297
...against Mikelson, was an appealable final judgment. ¶40 We addressed this precise issue in Federal Sav. and Loan Ins. v. Hamilton (1989), 241 Mont. 367, 786 P.2d 1190. There, the Hamiltons defaulted on a promissory note secured by a deed of trust on property to be developed into a mobile ho......