Court Opinion

ID: 9546129
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 17:25:19.471934+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:16:01.994730
License: Public Domain

CORCORAN, Judge,
dissenting in part.
Although I agree with this opinion’s disposition on the merits, I respectfully dissent from the award of attorney’s fees.
I do not believe that this action arises out of the promissory note and deed of trust. The contest arises out of whether Brecheisen Wholesale and John E. Brecheisen, who had personally guaranteed the corporate obligation to United Bank, could give a preference to United Bank through the note and deed of trust while Sun Valley and Cascade were pursuing Brecheisen Wholesale through the courts to judgment. To my mind, this kind of dispute is not one which can be said to arise out of the promissory note and deed of trust. It is simply a question of priority.
In any event, assuming the majority is correct on this point, I believe this court should exercise its discretion to deny attor*70ney’s fees to United Bank. Sun Valley and Cascade have suffered enough by virtue of the preference given to United Bank.