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

• After a mortgage foreclosure judgment, the Petitioner acquired rights in the foreclosed property from the heirs of the deceased mortgagor. The Petitioner sought to participate in the Respondent's redemption of the property by asserting an equitable right of contribution (para 1).

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Petitioner-Appellant: Argued for the right to participate in the redemption of the foreclosed property by asserting an equitable right of contribution, contending that this right should be asserted within a "reasonable time" rather than being bound by the statutory redemption period (paras 1, 3).
• Respondent-Appellee: [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the Petitioner's equitable right of contribution allows participation in the redemption of the foreclosed property after the statutory redemption period has expired (para 1).

Disposition

• The district court's judgment on the pleadings was affirmed, denying the Petitioner's claim to participate in the redemption of the foreclosed property through an equitable right of contribution after the expiration of the statutory redemption period (para 8).

Reasons

• Per J. Miles Hanisee, with Jennifer L. Attrep and Shammara H. Henderson concurring, the Court held that the equitable right of contribution is derivative of the right to redeem and does not survive the expiration of the statutory redemption period. The Court found the Petitioner's reliance on Laura v. Christian inapplicable as it was not a foreclosure case and did not override the statutory deadlines for redemption. The Court referenced Woodall, which clarified the operation of the equitable doctrine of contribution in the foreclosure context, stating that a cotenancy is not extinguished by a foreclosure sale but survives until the redemption period expires. Thus, the Petitioner's right to contribute, being dependent on a right to redeem, was terminated with the expiration of the statutory deadline (paras 2-7).