Mellon Bank v. Aetna Business Credit Corp.
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
619 F.2d 1001 (1980)
- Written by Mary Pfotenhauer, JD
Facts
Opp, Elgin, and Wise (the borrowers) obtained a mortgage loan from Aetna Business Credit Corp. (Aetna) (defendant) and a construction loan from Mellon Bank (Mellon) (plaintiff) for the development of an office complex called Kensington Square. Aetna and Mellon agreed that Aetna would purchase the construction loan from Mellon, unless the borrowers became insolvent. Aetna later argued that it was not required to purchase the construction loan, because the borrowers were insolvent. Aetna argued that the term “insolvent” in the agreement should be interpreted in its usual commercial sense and that the borrowers were insolvent under this interpretation. Mellon argued that insolvency should be determined without considering the liabilities or assets involved in the Kensington Square project and that the borrowers were not insolvent under this interpretation. The district court held that the borrowers’ insolvency should be determined without considering the liabilities or assets involved in the Kensington Square project, because Aetna, in making the contract, did not give significant consideration to the borrowers’ possible insolvency. Aetna appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Cahn, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 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.
