Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Mid Kansas Federal Savings and Loan Association v. Dynamic Development Corporation

Supreme Court of Arizona
804 P.2d 1310 (1991)


Dynamic Development Corporation (Dynamic) (defendant) obtained a loan from Mid Kansas Federal Savings and Loan Association (Mid Kansas) (plaintiff) for the construction of ten spec houses. Subsequently, Dynamic obtained a second loan from Mid Kansas to complete the construction. Mid Kansas foreclosed on each loan, with four spec houses remaining unsold. At the time of foreclosure, there was approximately $425,000 outstanding on the first loan and approximately $102,000 outstanding on the second loan. Mid Kansas held a foreclosure sale on the second loan and purchased the four spec houses with a credit bid equaling the outstanding balance on the second loan. At the time of the sale, Dynamic had constructed the four houses but they were not yet occupied. After the foreclosure sale on the second loan, Mid Kansas chose not to hold a foreclosure sale on the first loan but rather brought suit to waive the security of the first loan and obtain the balance due under that loan. The market value of the four houses was approximately $556,000. The trial court granted Mid Kansas summary judgment. The court of appeals reversed, finding that Arizona’s anti-deficiency statute barred Mid Kansas’s action. Mid Kansas appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.


The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Feldman, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Concurrence/Dissent (Cameron, J.)

The concurrence/dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the judge’s concurrence in part and dissent in part.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

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 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read 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. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 221,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 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.