Attorney Devi Colene Yorty's Legal Cases

Debt and lending agreements

Armed Forces Bank, N.A. v. Hicks, 13CA0875, P.3d (Colo. App. June 5, 2014)

Jun 05, 2014

OUTCOME: The Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed and held: (1) C.R.S. 38-38-106(6)'s "good faith" requirement can be waived and was waived in this instance and (2) initial disclosures need contain only materials relevant to disputed facts plead with paticularity.

When a large commercial development outside of Glenwood Springs, Colorado failed, the secured lender successfully appointed a receiver, foreclosed upon the development, and submitted the winning bid to ... purchase the development at its foreclosure sale. When the lender then pursued a deficiency judgment against the project's guarantors, the guarantors lodged numerous defenses, including the lender's failure to make a good faith foreclosure bid under C.R.S. 38-38-106(6) and failure to supplement its initial disclosures with materials relevant to facts alleged in motions practice but not plead with particularity in pleadings. The secured lender respnded that the guarantors waived C.R.S. 38-38-106(6) defenses in their unconditional guaranty contracts; regardless of waiver, the foreclosure bid was a good faith bid under C.R.S. 38-38-106(6); and the secured lender was not required to supplement its initial disclosures with materials not relevant to disputed facts plead with particularity. The trial court granted summary judgment in the secured lender's favor and held: (1) good faith bid defenses under C.R.S. 38-38-106(6) can be contractually waived; (2) the guarantors waived C.R.S. 38-38-106(6) defenses in their unconditional guaranty contracts; and (3) initial disclosures need not be supplemented with materials not relevant to disputed facts plead with particularity.

Appeals

Byerly v. Bank of Colorado, 2013 COA 35, P.3d _ (Colo. App. March 14, 2013)

Mar 14, 2013

OUTCOME: Court of Appeals reversed and held: (1) mechanic's lien was knowingly overvalued under C.R.S. 8-22-128 and (2) because project manager contracted directly with project's owner, C.R.S. 38-22-101(2)-(3) did not require his contract to be recorded.

Mechanic's lien dispute following the financial collapse of residential subdivision near Fort Collins, Colorado. During financial collapse, the subdivision's construction manager filed a mechanic's li ... en for compensation including bonus pay to which the manager was not entitled until the subdivision made a profit. The project's construction lender, and later the project's foreclosure purchaser, objected to the lien as knowingly overvalued under C.R.S. 38-22-128. At trial, court held that: (1) lien was not knowingly overvalued and (2) lien claimant was entitled to value of work performed rather than lower compensation earned under his contract because the manager's contract with the project owner was not recorded under C.R.S. 38-22-101(2)-(3).

Chapter 11 bankruptcy

Valley Bank & Trust Co. v. Spectrum Scan LLC (In re Tracy Broadcasting Corp.), 696 F.3d 1051 (10th Cir. 2012)

Oct 16, 2012

OUTCOME: Secured creditor, Valley Bank and Trust Co., prevailed on appeal and was given priority over judgment creditor in proceeds of post petition transfer of debtor's FDIC license.

Bankruptcy priority dispute between secured lender and judgment creditor regarding: (1) whether security interest in general intangibles includes a security interest in the proceeds of a FDIC license ... transfer that (2) survives a bankruptcy petition filed before the license's transfer is arranged.

Commercial real estate

Great Plains National Bank N.A. v. Mount, 280 P.3d 670 (Colo. App. 2012)

Apr 12, 2012

OUTCOME: The Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision on all issues.

An Oklahoma cattleman obtained a loan secured by all cattle he owned and thereafter acquired. Sometime later, the Oklahoma cattleman wrote a bad check to purchase cattle from Missouri for immediate sa ... le to a buyer in Colorado. The Oklahoma lender covered the bad check and attempted to recoup its losses by enforcing its security interest against the cattle sold to Colorado. The cattle's Colorado buyer defended that he did not buy the cattle subject to security interests created by the Oklahoma seller because the cattle were "produced" in Missouri and Missouri, unlike Oklahoma, does not maintain a central filing system under the United States Food Security Act ("FSA"), 7 U.S.C. 1631(e). The Colorado buyer's lender simultaneously defended that its purchase money security interest in the cattle was superior to the Oklahoma lender's security interest in cattle sold to the Colorado buyer. The trial court granted the Oklahoma lender summary judgment against both defendants. First, the trial court held that the cattle purchased from a Missouri seller and sold to a Colorado buyer were "produced" in Oklahoma under the FSA because Oklahoma was the state in which the cattle were "made available for commerce" to the Colorado buyer. Second, the trial court held that under Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code, the Oklahoma lender's security interest attached to the cattle sold to the Colorado buyer, perfected as soon as the cattle were purchased, and had priority over the interest of the Colorado buyer's lender because the Oklahoma lender was the first to file in Oklahoma and Colorado.

Devi Colene Yorty's Legal Cases (4)

Armed Forces Bank, N.A. v. Hicks, 13CA0875, __ P.3d __ (Colo. App. June 5, 2014)

Byerly v. Bank of Colorado, 2013 COA 35, __ P.3d ___ (Colo. App. March 14, 2013)

Valley Bank & Trust Co. v. Spectrum Scan LLC (In re Tracy Broadcasting Corp.), 696 F.3d 1051 (10th Cir. 2012)

Great Plains National Bank N.A. v. Mount, 280 P.3d 670 (Colo. App. 2012)

Armed Forces Bank, N.A. v. Hicks, 13CA0875, P.3d (Colo. App. June 5, 2014)

Byerly v. Bank of Colorado, 2013 COA 35, P.3d _ (Colo. App. March 14, 2013)