Opinion ID: 2593996
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Can the district court judge rewrite an unambiguous contract?

Text: More specifically, Y-O asserts the district court erred in its ruling that, although Y-O was not in default on the note and mortgage as Emken alleged, Y-O: 1) shall provide information to Emken showing a plat of the property subject to the mortgage which designates the lots that have been sold and the lots and unplatted tracts that remain unsold; 2) shall provide Emken, within thirty (30) days after entry of the amended judgment and order, a full and complete accounting of all business activities of Y-O Investments, Inc., which involve the property which is the subject matter of the mortgage held by Emken; 3) shall, upon each sale, exchange or transfer of any lot or tract of land contained within Emken's mortgage, make written request to Emken, through her attorney, for a release of that lot or tract from the mortgage, such request describing the property to be released, containing a copy of the sales documents which set forth in detail the total sales price and terms of payment of same, and listing in detail the transaction's expenses; 4) shall maintain a sufficient amount of property, subject to Emken's mortgage, of sufficient value, equal to one hundred and fifty percent (150%) of the then balance of principal and accrued interest on Emken's promissory note and mortgage; and 5) shall pay two thousand dollars ($2,000) in attorney's fees to Emken.