HOLY CROSS CHURCH OF GOD IN CHRIST v. Wolf

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that statements from defendant’s summary judgment pleadings that “Defendant accepts Plaintiff’s argument that the note was accelerated . . . on August 15, 1994” conclusively established the acceleration date
• noting that although accrual is a legal question, “whether a holder has accelerated a note is a fact question”
• “Section 16.0035 modifies the general rule that a claim accrues and limitations begins to run on each installment when it becomes due.”
• “Assertions of fact, not plead in the alternative, in the live pleadings of a party are regarded as formal judicial admissions.”
• “[T]he action accrues . . . when the holder actually exercises its option to accelerate.”
• if a promissory note contains an optional acceleration clause, limitations does not automatically start to run upon default; an action accrues “only when the holder actually exercises its option to accelerate” the entire note

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).