Cardon v. Cotton Lane Holdings, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding companion Cal. Civ. Proc. Code §, 580d barred a deficiency judgment following nonjudicial foreclosure of Arizona property because California law governed note
• holding companion Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 580d barred a deficiency judgment following nonjudicial foreclosure of Arizona property because California law governed note
• stating that the parties’ choice-of-law provision was valid and effective because the parties could have contractually agreed to the relevant issue
• finding that, because the parties could have contractually prohibited a default judgment under Arizona or California law, the parties’ contractual choice to apply California substantive law was dispositive
• accepting special action jurisdiction in part because relief would end litigation and “spare[] the parties and the judicial system unnecessary time and expense”
• accepting special action jurisdiction in part because relief would end litigation and “eliminate[] the necessity of any future appeals, and spare[] the parties and the judicial system unnecessary time and expense”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).