Straub v. Lessman, 403 N.W.2d 5 (N.D. 1987)
Legal information, not legal advice. Verify against the cited opinion.
- Citation: Straub v. Lessman, 403 N.W.2d 5 (N.D. 1987)
- Court / Year: North Dakota Supreme Court, 1987
- Topic tags: foreclosure, cancellation_by_action, redemption, election_of_remedies
- Facts: Lucille and Walter Straub sold ~1,128 acres of farmland to Patrick and Wendy Lessman for 73,610 down; annual installments of $18,358). After late/short payments the parties renegotiated (December 11, 1985), with the balance payable in 17 annual installments at 8% beginning March 15, 1986. The Lessmans missed the 1986 installment, and Straub brought an action in district court to cancel the contract for deed (rather than proceeding by statutory notice under chapter 32-18). The district court granted summary judgment cancelling the contract and set a two-month period for the Lessmans to redeem by paying the entire remaining balance with interest.
- Holding: Cancellation of a contract for deed by statutory notice (chapter 32-18) is not an exclusive remedy; the seller may instead elect to cancel by action, for which the chapter’s written notice of intent to cancel is not required. When the seller cancels by action, there is no statutorily prescribed redemption period — the length of any redemption window is left to the sound discretion of the district court, sitting in equity. The two-month redemption period was not an abuse of discretion on these facts.
- Reasoning: Cancellation of a contract for deed by action is an equitable proceeding; the equity court’s traditional power to cancel land-sale contracts runs parallel to (and is cumulative with) the chapter 32-18 statutory notice procedure. Because the statute governs only cancellation by notice, its one-year/six-month correction periods do not bind a court cancelling by action, which instead fashions redemption relief according to the equities of the case.
- Practical impact for CFD operators/buyers: North Dakota gives the seller a two-track default remedy — fast statutory cancellation by notice (chapter 32-18, with a long, fixed one-year/six-month cure) or a judicial action to cancel where the court sets redemption in its discretion and can grant a much shorter redemption window. This is the controlling authority resolving North Dakota’s forfeiture-vs.-foreclosure question: the instrument is neither strictly forfeited by clause nor mandatorily foreclosed as a mortgage; relief is statutory notice or equitable cancellation at the seller’s election.
- Good-law status: good_law (North Dakota Supreme Court; controlling on cancellation-by-action and discretionary redemption).
- Source (retrieved): https://law.justia.com/cases/north-dakota/supreme-court/1987/11297-3.html · Verified: 2026-06-08
Jurisdictions that follow / cite: north-dakota
Disclaimer. Legal information, not legal advice. Confirm the opinion is still good law before relying on it.