Crozier, et al. v. Wint, No. 12-3507 (8th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CasePlaintiffs filed suit against defendant to recover on a promissory note. On appeal, plaintiffs challenged the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of defendant. The court concluded that, construing the evidence most favorably to plaintiffs, a genuine issue of material fact existed as to whether the primary purpose of the loan was consumer or non-consumer in nature. The district court correctly declined to create a de minimus exception to the no notice rule. The court reversed and remanded.
Court Description: Civil case. The district court erred in granting defendant summary judgment as a genuine issue of material fact existed as to whether the primary purpose of the loan in question was consumer or non-consumer for purposes of applying Missouri's no notice-no deficiency rule.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.