AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• Plaintiff, Rabo Agrifinance, Inc., held two promissory notes secured by a mortgage on property located in New Mexico and a deed of trust on land in Texas, initially owned 50% by Terra. Terra later acquired a 100% interest in the New Mexico property. Plaintiff sought to foreclose the mortgage to the full extent of Terra's 100% interest, invoking the after-acquired title doctrine, which allows a grantor's subsequently acquired title to automatically benefit the grantee (paras 2-3).

Procedural History

• Rabo Agrifinance, Inc. v. Terra XXI, Ltd., 2012-NMCA-038, 274 P.3d 127: Reversed the district court’s ruling that the doctrine of after-acquired title did not apply and remanded for further proceedings (para 3).
• District Court of Quay County: On remand, applied the after-acquired title doctrine, granting summary judgment in favor of Plaintiff (para 4).

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff: Argued that the after-acquired title doctrine applies, allowing foreclosure on the entire 100% interest in the New Mexico property acquired by Terra after the mortgage was granted (para 3).
• Defendants (Terra): Contended that the after-acquired title doctrine should not apply as it was limited by the extent of the grantor’s conveyance and that the mortgage did not convey a 100% interest. Also argued that the judgment had been satisfied through the sale of the Texas property (paras 6, 13-15).

Legal Issues

• Whether the after-acquired title doctrine applies to allow foreclosure on the entire 100% interest in the New Mexico property acquired by Terra after the mortgage was granted (para 3).
• Whether the judgment has been satisfied through the sale of the Texas property, thus relieving Terra from the judgment under Rule 1-060(B)(5) (para 13).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Plaintiff and denied Terra’s motion under Rule 1-060(B)(5) (paras 18-19).

Reasons

• Cynthia A. Fry, Judge (James J. Wechsler, Judge, Michael E. Vigil, Judge concurring): The court held that the after-acquired title doctrine applies because the mortgage was granted "with mortgage covenants," purporting to convey a 100% interest in the property. The court found no reliance on Plaintiff’s intent in applying the doctrine. Regarding Terra's motion under Rule 1-060(B)(5), the court found no abuse of discretion in the district court's denial, as Terra failed to provide authority supporting its argument that the judgment had been satisfied through the sale of the Texas property. The court also declined to review Terra's argument regarding the primary fund doctrine due to lack of preservation (paras 6-17).