J.R. Hale Contracting Company v. United New Mexico Bank at Albuquerque

799 P.2d 581 (1990)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

J.R. Hale Contracting Company v. United New Mexico Bank at Albuquerque

New Mexico Supreme Court
799 P.2d 581 (1990)

Play video

Facts

Over an 11-year period, United New Mexico Bank at Albuquerque (United) (defendant) extended numerous lines of credit to J.R. Hale Contracting Company, Inc. (Hale) (plaintiff). Although Hale was often late in making payments, United declined to take any adverse action other than occasionally contacting Hale to request the overdue payments. In November 1982, United extended a $400,000 loan to Hale. The loan note required one interest payment to be made by March 1, 1983, and provided that, upon any past due payments, United was entitled to exercise its right to accelerate payment of the entire balance without notice to Hale. The following year, Hale met with United several times to discuss the possibility of borrowing additional funds. Although Hale failed to make the interest payment, United did not remind Hale about the payment during the meetings. Hale was not notified of United’s intention to exercise the right to accelerate payment until March 24, when United gave Hale a letter demanding immediate payment of the entire balance. The notice provided that United had chosen to accelerate because Hale had failed to make the interest payment and because United had concerns about Hale’s overall ability to make payments on the note. Hale filed suit against United, claiming wrongful acceleration. The trial court granted a directed verdict in United’s favor based on the explicit language of the note. Hale appealed, arguing that United’s conduct invalidated the terms of the note.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Ransom, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 811,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership