United-Bilt Homes, Inc. v. Sampson
Arkansas Supreme Court
315 Ark. 156 (1993)
- Written by Mary Phelan D'Isa, JD
Facts
Sampson, a homeowner, sued United-Bilt Homes, Inc, his mortgage company and the loss-payee on Sampson’s homeowner’s policy, in state court after United-Bilt refused to release insurance proceeds to the contractor who repaired Sampson’s home after a fire. Sampson won the case and was awarded compensatory and punitive damages. United-Bilt then brought a foreclosure action against Sampson. Sampson sought dismissal and alleged that the foreclosure action was barred under the Arkansas compulsory-counterclaim rule, which for all relevant purposes was identical to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 13(a). The court agreed and dismissed United-Bilt’s case, finding that the foreclosure was a compulsory counterclaim that should have been brought in the earlier case. United-Bilt appealed and argued that its foreclosure claim did not arise out of the same transaction or occurrence that was litigated in the first case and that, at the time United-Bilt answered the complaint in the earlier case, it had not yet exercised its option to accelerate Sampson’s debt, therefore, its foreclosure claim was not mature and could not be a compulsory counterclaim.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Corbin, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 781,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 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.