Tennessee Bank & Trust v. Scott Michael Boruff
Syllabus
A bank brought an action against a borrower for failure to repay a promissory note. The borrower asserted that the bank failed to mitigate its damages by failing to sell the shares of stock it held as collateral to pay off the loan at a time when the stock's value was high. After a bench trial, the trial court granted judgment in favor of the bank, holding that the parol evidence rule prevented consideration of his purported oral modification of the parties' agreement. Borrower appeals. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- describing interests owned and rights exercised by unit owners and condominium association
- in reviewing board’s decision to grant a variance, trial court hears the matter de novo and determines the legal validity of board’s decision upon facts found by court
- allowing neighboring unit owners independently to seek and appeal variances
- association and board members as plaintiffs
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Judge Andy D. Bennett
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.