Adams Bank & Trust v. Brown

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly versionPDF versionPDF version

Adams Bank & Trust v. Brown

Case Number
Court Number
Call Date
September 14, 2017
Case Time
1:30 PM
Case Summary

A-16-1065,  Adams Bank & Trust v. Brown (Appellants)

Lincoln County, District Court Judge Donald E. Rowlands

Attorney for Appellants:  Steve Windrum (Malcom, Nelson & Windrum, LLC)

Attorney for Appellee:  Robert B. Reynolds, Michael D. Samuelson (Reynolds, Korth & Samuelson, P.C, L.L.O.)

Civil Action:  Deficiency Action Following Trustee’s Sale

Action Taken by Trial Court:  The district court sustained the appellee’s motion to dismiss the appellants’ counterclaim and subsequently entered a final judgment in favor of the appellee.

Assignments of Error on Appeal: The errors assigned by the appellants on appeal include that the district court erred in (1) finding the appellee had no duty to pay real estate taxes to redeem a tax sale certificate on the foreclosed property or protect the security it had in the real estate; (2) finding that Neb. Rev. Stat. § 76-1013 was applicable; (3) finding the total amount of indebtedness secured by the deed of trust was $114,862.04; (4) finding the appellants were liable for the appellee’s attorney fees; (5) finding the primary issue in the case was the fair market value of the real estate on the date of sale; (6) finding the fair market value of the real estate on the date of the sale was $95,000; (7) finding Neb. Rev. Stat. § 45-1,113 applied to the appellants’ claims and defenses; (8) dismissing the first, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, and eleventh theories of recovery on the Browns’ counterclaim; (9) receiving exhibits 28 and 35 over the appellants’ objections; (10) allowing certain testimony over the appellants’ objection; (11) dismissing the appellants’ second and tenth theories of recovery after trial and finding that they failed to meet their burden of proof; and (12) entering judgment in favor of the appellee instead of in the appellants’ favor.

Case Location
Court Type
District Court
Panel Text
Inbody, Pirtle, and Riedmann, Judges