Betty G. Amos and the Estate of Thomas R. Righetti v. Aspen Alps 123, LLC, and Equitable Bank — Coats, J., Dissenting

Summary

Justice Coats, dissenting, would have invalidated the judicial authorization and foreclosure sale because the bank failed to identify and serve the deceased tenant-in-common's estate and failed to provide the district court with information required by the foreclosure rule. He rejected imputing the estate's notice from the widow's alleged notice, reasoning that a co-representative's knowledge does not automatically bind the estate and that judicial authorization protects interests beyond minimal procedural notice. Chief Justice Bender, concurring in part and dissenting in part, agreed with the majority on the Rule 120 issue but would have held that the bidders' agreement to stop bidding constituted unlawful bid rigging.