Eiferle v. Toppino, 90 N.M. 469, 565 P.2d 340 (N.M. 1977)

Legal information, not legal advice. Verify against the cited opinion.

Citation: 90 N.M. 469, 565 P.2d 340 (1977) (decided June 14, 1977)
Court / Year: Supreme Court of New Mexico, 1977
Topic tags: forfeiture · due_on_sale · remedies
Facts: A standard “Valliant Form” real estate contract sold an Albuquerque residence: $3, 000 d o w n, b u yers a ss u m e d a$ 17,259.93 Prudential first mortgage (a wrap), plus $30/ m o t o an escro w a g e n t f or t h ese ll e r^{'} se q u i t y . A f t er a re t u r n e d c h ec k, P r u d e n t ia l g a v e t h e b u yers u n t i l * * M a rc h 31 * * t oc u re a ll d e l in q u e n c i es . T h e b u yersc u re d (c a s hi e r^{'} sc h ec ka ppl i e d b y A p r i l 1) . B u t o n * * M a rc h 28 * * — b e f ore t h ec u re d e a d l in e — t h ese ll e r^{'} s a tt or n eyse n t a d e man d l e tt er, an d t h eescro w a g e n tt h e n re f u se d t h e b u yer s^{'} p a y m e n t b ec a u se t h ey ha d n o t a l so in c l u d e d$ 25 for the demand letter’s fees. On June 1 the seller withdrew the escrow papers, filed an affidavit of default and forfeiture, and recorded the escrowed special warranty deed reconveying title.
Holding: The forfeiture would not be enforced. The seller’s premature demand (before the cure window ran) was “of no effect,” and to permit cancellation, recapture of title, and retention of all payments “would result in an ‘unfairness which shocks the conscience of the court.‘”
Reasoning: Courts will not rewrite a contract the parties freely entered, and forfeiture clauses are enforceable “absent unfairness which shocks the conscience of the court”; but where, as here, the buyers were given (and met) a cure opportunity and the seller jumped the gun, equity avoids the forfeiture.
Practical impact for CFD operators/buyers: (1) Documents the New Mexico escrow-deed self-help forfeiture mechanic (affidavit of default + recording the special warranty deed — no foreclosure). (2) A seller who makes a premature default demand can lose the forfeiture. (3) Illustrates the lawful but acceleration-risky wrap over an assumed first mortgage.
Good-law status: Good law; cited in Russell, Huckins, and Buckingham.
Source (retrieved): https://static.case.law/nm/90/cases/0469-01.json · Verified: 2026-06-08

Jurisdictions that follow / cite: new-mexico

Disclaimer. Legal information, not legal advice. Confirm the opinion is still good law before relying on it.

Contract4Deed Wiki

Explorer

Eiferle v. Toppino (1977)

Eiferle v. Toppino, 90 N.M. 469, 565 P.2d 340 (N.M. 1977)

Graph View

Backlinks