Foreclosure Deficiency: Construction Loan vs. Home Improvement Loan

By: Kevin J. Parker In a recent Arizona Court of Appeals case, Helvetica Servicing, Inc., v. Pasquan, 2019 WL 3820015, (8/15/19), the Court of Appeals addressed the distinction between (1) a construction loan (or refinance of same) and (2) a … Continue reading

Author: Kevin Parker | Leave a comment Tagged , , ,

Share this Article:

Nevada Supreme Court Clarifies the Litigation Waiver of the One-Action Rule

By Bob L. Olson  Nevada has a one-action rule which, with limited exceptions, requires a creditor seeking to recover a debt secured by real property to proceed against the security first prior to seeking recovery from the debtor personally. In … Continue reading

Author: Bob L. Olson | Leave a comment Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

Share this Article:

California’s One-Action Rule May Apply to Federal Lenders

By: Anthony J. Carucci California’s one-action rule provides that “here can be but one form of action for the recovery of any debt or the enforcement of any right secured by mortgage upon real property or an estate for years … Continue reading

Author: acarucci | Leave a comment Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

Share this Article:

Guarantors Can Waive Anti-Deficiency Protections

By:  Richard H. Herold and Ben Reeves In Arizona, guarantors can now be held liable for deficiencies even where borrowers avoid liability due to Arizona’s anti-deficiency statute. Arizona courts have been active in the last few years in addressing the … Continue reading

Author: Ben Reeves | Leave a comment Tagged , , , ,

Share this Article:

If Receiver’s Sales Aren’t Foreclosures, What Are They?

By:  Ben Reeves & Bob Olson When no statute specifically authorizes a court-appointed receiver to sell real property, what type of sale is it?  The Supreme Court of Nevada recently addressed this question, holding that “a receiver sale of real … Continue reading

Author: Ben Reeves | 1 Comment Tagged , , , ,

Share this Article:

Are Vacant Lots Protected Under Arizona’s Anti-deficiency Statutes?

By:  Ben Reeves No, of course not.  Arizona’s anti-deficiency statutes only prohibit deficiency judgments after a trustee’s sale of a “dwelling”.  Under no definition can a vacant lot constitute a “dwelling”.  This was the Arizona Supreme Court’s holding in BMO … Continue reading

Author: Ben Reeves | 2 Comments Tagged , , , ,

Share this Article:

Update – Prospective Waivers of “Fair Market Value” Hearings are Definitely Void.

By:  Ben Reeves In 2013, we blogged about the Arizona Court of Appeals’ determination that prospective contractual waivers of “fair market value” hearings are unenforceable as a matter of public policy.  The link to our prior blog post is here.  … Continue reading

Author: Ben Reeves | Leave a comment Tagged , , , ,

Share this Article:

Nevada Supreme Court and District Court Issue Decisions Regarding Nevada’s Limitations on Deficiency Judgments.

By:  Bob Olson and Nathan Kanute In 2011 the Nevada Legislature enacted Assembly Bill 273 (“AB 273”) which amended NRS 40.459 by limiting deficiency judgments to the difference between the amount the lender paid to acquire the loan or obligation and … Continue reading

Author: Bob L. Olson | Leave a comment Tagged , , , , ,

Share this Article:

Borrowers Can Avoid Liability Even After a Trustee’s Sale

By:  Ben Reeves Since a lender must have a valid debt and valid lien to conduct a trustee’s sale, a borrower that allows the foreclosure sale to occur impliedly agrees that the debt and lien are valid.  In Madison v. … Continue reading

Author: Ben Reeves | Leave a comment Tagged , , ,

Share this Article:

Amendments to Arizona’s Anti-deficiency Statute Exclude Homebuilders from Anti-Deficiency Protection

By:  Ben Reeves Last Tuesday, April 20, 2014, Arizona’s Governor, Jan Brewer, signed HB 2018 into law.  This bill closes a long-standing loophole that allowed commercial homebuilders to take advantage of Arizona’s anti-deficiency statute, even though the statute was originally … Continue reading

Author: Ben Reeves | Leave a comment Tagged , , ,

Share this Article:

California Amends its Anti-Deficiency Statute

By:  Ben Reeves As of January 1, 2014, California amended its anti-deficiency statute to stop mortgage lenders from “collecting” from homeowners on post-foreclosure debts.  Although the amendments were designed to tackle a purely consumer / residential real estate issue, only … Continue reading

Author: Ben Reeves | Leave a comment Tagged , ,

Share this Article:

Arizona Court of Appeals Holds That Certain Residential Developers Are Not Protected By The Anti-Deficiency Statute After Foreclosure Of A Deed Of Trust On Vacant Land

By Eric Spencer and Adam Lang Nearly three years ago, in M&I Marshall & Isley Bank v. Mueller, the Arizona Court of Appeals held that the Arizona anti-deficiency statute protects a borrower who started, but never completed, construction of a … Continue reading

Author: Adam Lang | Leave a comment Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

Share this Article:

Guarantors Beware! A.R.S. § 33-814 May Not Save You from a Deficiency Judgment

By:  Ben Reeves In First Credit Union v. Courtney, 309 P.3d 929, 669 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 18 (Ct. App. 2013), the Arizona Court of Appeals rejected three creative arguments that A.R.S. § 33-814 protected the guarantors from paying on their guaranty.  … Continue reading

Author: Ben Reeves | Leave a comment Tagged , , ,

Share this Article:

Arizona’s Anti-deficiency Statute, A.R.S. 33-814(G), Cannot be Prospectively Waived Says the Court of Appeals

By:  Ben Reeves In Parkway Bank & Trust Co. v. Zivkovic, 662 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 26 (Ct. App. 2013), the Arizona Court of Appeals held that provisions in loan documents purporting to waive the applicability of A.R.S. § 33-814(G) violate Arizona … Continue reading

Author: Ben Reeves | Leave a comment Tagged , , , ,

Share this Article:

A Person Owning a Fractional Interest in a Vacation Home is Protected by Arizona’s Anti-deficiency Statute

By:  Ben Reeves In Independent Mortgage v. Alaburda, the Arizona Court of Appeals held that Arizona’s anti-deficiency statute, A.R.S. § 33-814(G), precluded a lender from suing its borrowers for a deficiency after foreclosing on the borrowers’ fractional interest in a … Continue reading

Author: Ben Reeves | Leave a comment Tagged , , ,

Share this Article: