section 51.003 right of offset in Texas

2016See PlainsCapital Bank v. Martin, 459 S.W.3d 550 , 557 (Tex.2015) (offset under § 51.003 operates as an affirmative defense to deficiency claim) (citing Moayedi v. Interstate 35/Chisam Rd., L.P., 438 S.W.3d 1 , 6 (Tex.2014) ).

2015See Moayedi, 438 S.W.3d at 8 (concluding that waiver of “any,” “each,” and “every” defense in guaranty, though broad, included rights to valuation and offset under section 51.003).

2015See also LaSalle Bank Nat’l Ass’n v. Sleutel, 289 F.3d 837, 839-42 (5th Cir. 2002) (holding guarantor waived § 51.003 rights under agreement providing “Guarantor expressly waives and relinquishes all rights and remedies now or hereafter accorded 15 Second, every document signed by Defendants unambiguously waives rights under § 51.003.

2013VPS compares this waiver clause to a purportedly similar waiver clause that was deemed to have waived rights under section 51.003 in a Fifth Circuit opinion, LaSalle Bank Nat’l Ass’n v. Sleutel, 289 F.3d 837 (5th Cir.2002).

2014The waiver included in Olson’s guaranty specifically waived the right to offset under section 51.003; the guaranty in Moayedi provided 9 that the guaranty “shall not be discharged, impaired or affected by . . . any defense . . ., each and every such defense being hereby waived by the undersigned Guarantor.” Id. at 794 .

2013See Interstate 35/Chisam Rd., L.P. v. Moayedi, 377 S.W.3d 791, 795-802 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2012, pet. filed); Tran v. Compass Bank, No. 02-11- 00189-CV, 2012 Tex. App. LEXIS 323 , **2-7 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Jan. 12, 2012, no pet.) (mem. op.); Kelly v. First State Bank Cent.

2017Since Moayedi was decided, the supreme court has referred to the right of offset under section 51.003 as "an affirmative defense to a deficiency claim." See PlainsCapital Bank v. Martin , 459 S.W.3d 550 , 557 (Tex. 2015).

2016See PlainsCapital Bank v. Martin, 459 S.W.3d 550 , 557 (Tex.2015) (offset under § 51.003 operates as an affirmative defense to deficiency claim) (citing Moayedi v. Interstate 35/Chisam Rd., L.P., 438 S.W.3d 1 , 6 (Tex.2014) ).

2022Corp., 408 S.W.3d 581, 592 (Tex. App.—Austin 2013, pet. denied) (request by motion can meet pleading requirement).

2015For example: ● In the note, 410 Centre agreed it had no right to claim a credit or offset based on a fair market value appraisal of the property at the time of foreclosure and, in fact, it agreed to pay “the entire unpaid principal balance and all accrued interest” “without relief from valuation and appraisement laws.” (PX2 (¶¶ 3.3, 6).) ● In the guaranty, Urbahns agreed to pay “without relief from valuation and appraisement laws, all amounts payable” under the guaranty, and expressly waived “[a]ny and all rights Guarantor may have under any anti-deficiency statute or other similar protections

2014His refusal to do so was unreasonable and arbitrary, and it was accordingly an abuse of discretion.1 1 “A trial court abuses its discretion if it acts in an arbitrary or unreasonable manner without reference to any guiding rules or principles.” Walker v. Gutierrez, 111 S.W.3d 56, 62 (Tex. 2003). 1.

2012Moayedi also contends the El Paso Court of Appeals has implicitly rejected the argument that the right to offset under section 51.003 can be waived. 1 See Cabot Capital Corp. v. USDR, Inc., 346 S.W.3d 634, 638 (Tex.App.-El Paso 2009, pet. denied).

2012See Hackberry, 205 S.W.3d at 50 ; Wright, 137 S.W.3d at 294 .