Meincke v. Northwest Bank & Trust Co.
756 N.W.2d 223 (2008)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A subordination agreement is supported by valid consideration when a lender provides new financing to a third party in reliance on the agreement. The lender's action constitutes a legal detriment that is deemed 'bargained for' if the subordinating party's promise induced the loan, even if the request for the loan was implied rather than explicit.
Facts:
- Janice Meincke loaned $90,000 to SCRAMM Enterprises, a business owned by her daughter, Sandra Marti, and nephew, Craig Meincke.
- Meincke's loan was secured by a mortgage on SCRAMM's property, which held priority over other existing loans.
- Northwest Bank & Trust offered to provide a new, larger loan to the family's business to restructure its existing debts.
- As a condition for providing the new loan, Northwest Bank required that Janice Meincke sign a subordination agreement, which would move her mortgage's priority behind the bank's new mortgage.
- Northwest Bank did not communicate directly with Meincke, but with her nephew, Craig, who then discussed the agreement with her.
- Meincke signed the subordination agreement, understanding that doing so would place her 'second in line' for repayment.
- In reliance on Meincke's executed subordination agreement, Northwest Bank issued the new loan to the business.
- Shortly thereafter, the business failed, the property was sold in foreclosure, and the proceeds were insufficient to repay Meincke after Northwest Bank's mortgage was satisfied.
Procedural Posture:
- Janice Meincke sued Northwest Bank & Trust in an Iowa district court, asking the court to find the subordination agreement null and void for lack of consideration.
- Meincke amended her petition to add a claim for intentional interference with a contract.
- At trial, Meincke's motion to amend her petition to add a claim of fraud was denied by the district court.
- The district court found the agreement was supported by consideration and entered judgment in favor of Northwest Bank.
- Meincke, as appellant, appealed to the Iowa Court of Appeals.
- The Court of Appeals reversed the district court's judgment, finding that substantial evidence did not support the finding of bargained-for consideration.
- Northwest Bank, as petitioner, petitioned the Supreme Court of Iowa for further review, which was granted.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a subordination agreement lack consideration when the subordinating party receives no direct personal benefit, but a lender, in reliance on the signed agreement, provides a new loan to a third party related to the subordinating party?
Opinions:
Majority - Wiggins, Justice.
No, the subordination agreement does not lack consideration. A contract is supported by consideration if there is a legal detriment to the promisee that was bargained for in exchange for the promise. Here, the promisee, Northwest Bank, suffered a legal detriment by loaning additional funds to the business, an act it was not previously obligated to perform. This detriment was bargained for because Meincke's promise to subordinate her mortgage induced the bank to make the loan. Even though the bank did not negotiate with Meincke directly, her act of signing the agreement—knowing it was a prerequisite for the loan to her family's business—constituted an implied request for the bank to suffer the detriment of providing the financing. Therefore, the essential elements of a bargained-for exchange are present, and the agreement is enforceable.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies the 'bargained-for' element of consideration in a three-party context, affirming that a direct, explicit request between the promisor and promisee is not required. It establishes that a promisor’s request can be implied from the circumstances, particularly when the promisor signs an agreement knowing it will induce the promisee to act for the benefit of a third party. This strengthens the enforceability of subordination agreements in commercial financing, as it protects lenders who rely on such agreements when restructuring debt, even if negotiations are handled through an intermediary like the debtor.
Unlock the full brief for Meincke v. Northwest Bank & Trust Co.