Crain

Ninety Five Ten v. Crain

Good Law
1991 Cal. App. LEXIS 622·231 Cal. App. 3d 36·282 Cal. Rptr. 141·91 Daily Journal DAR 6887·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4492
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 31, 1991No. C008321California1,790 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Carr, J.

This appeal presents a single legal issue of whether a creditor may recover prejudgment interest on interest-only installment payments due on a standard note. The trial court determined such interest was not recoverable. We shall affirm.

Because of the single issue in this appeal, an exhaustive recitation of the factual and procedural history is unnecessary. The record discloses that in a complex real estate transaction, a “Starker” exchange under 26 United States Code section 1031 (see Starker v. United States (9th Cir. 1979) 602 F.2d 1341 ), Roy L. Crain (Crain) sold his interest in a shopping center to a limited partnership, named Ninety Five Ten for $1,175,000. He received as partial payment a $250,000 note providing for interest-only payments at 11 percent until the maturity date of the note, at which time the entire principal plus accrued interest was due. This note was secured by a deed of trust on the *38 shopping center. Ninety Five Ten and others (Elzey) sued Crain and others on May 2, 1986, seeking rescission of the contract and damages, alleging that the sellers had misrepresented the value of the property. Crain cross-complained for judicial foreclosure…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.