Zions First National Bank v. Overthrust Oil & Gas Corp.

Utah Supreme Court

Zions First National Bank v. Overthrust Oil & Gas Corp.

826 P.2d 139, 179 Utah Adv. Rep. 10, 1992 Utah LEXIS 7, 1992 WL 20959

CourtUtah Supreme Court

DecidedFebruary 6, 1992

DocketNo. 900391

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 826 P.2d 139 (Zions First National Bank v. Overthrust Oil & Gas Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Utah Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Zions First National Bank v. Overthrust Oil & Gas Corp., 826 P.2d 139, 179 Utah Adv. Rep. 10, 1992 Utah LEXIS 7, 1992 WL 20959 (Utah 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

DURHAM, Justice:

Plaintiffs brought this foreclosure action concerning approximately 3,500 acres in Tooele County, Utah, that defendant Over-thrust Oil and Gas Corporation (Over-thrust) had pledged as security on a promissory note. At the time of foreclosure, title to the property was in Faust Land [140]*140(Faust), a wholly owned subsidiary of Over-thrust. Overthrust and. Faust cross-claimed against codefendant Capitol Thrift, the sole maker of the note, and against codefendant Richard Christenson, the original guarantor of the note. The district court entered a foreclosure decree but allowed Overthrust and Faust to cross-claim against Capitol Thrift. The district court dismissed the cross-claim against Christen-son. Overthrust and Faust appeal the decree of foreclosure and the dismissal of the Christenson cross-claim.

Overthrust and Faust assert both legal and factual grounds for reversal. With regard to their factual challenges, they have failed to marshal the evidence. See Doelle v. Bradley, 784 P.2d 1176, 1178 (Utah 1989). We can discern no reason to conclude that the district court’s factual findings were not fully supported. We also find Overthrust and Faust’s legal claims to be without merit. We therefore affirm.

HALL, C.J., HOWE, Associate C.J., and STEWART, J., concur. ZIMMERMAN, J., does not participate herein.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

DURHAM, Justice:

Plaintiffs brought this foreclosure action concerning approximately 3,500 acres in Tooele County, Utah, that defendant Over-thrust Oil and Gas Corporation (Over-thrust) had pledged as security on a promissory note. At the time of foreclosure, title to the property was in Faust Land [140]*140(Faust), a wholly owned subsidiary of Over-thrust. Overthrust and. Faust cross-claimed against codefendant Capitol Thrift, the sole maker of the note, and against codefendant Richard Christenson, the original guarantor of the note. The district court entered a foreclosure decree but allowed Overthrust and Faust to cross-claim against Capitol Thrift. The district court dismissed the cross-claim against Christen-son. Overthrust and Faust appeal the decree of foreclosure and the dismissal of the Christenson cross-claim.

Overthrust and Faust assert both legal and factual grounds for reversal. With regard to their factual challenges, they have failed to marshal the evidence. See Doelle v. Bradley, 784 P.2d 1176, 1178 (Utah 1989). We can discern no reason to conclude that the district court’s factual findings were not fully supported. We also find Overthrust and Faust’s legal claims to be without merit. We therefore affirm.

HALL, C.J., HOWE, Associate C.J., and STEWART, J., concur. ZIMMERMAN, J., does not participate herein.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

826 P.2d 139, 179 Utah Adv. Rep. 10, 1992 Utah LEXIS 7, 1992 WL 20959, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zions-first-national-bank-v-overthrust-oil-gas-corp-utah-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack