Legal Opinion

In re the Life Ass'n of America

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided October 15, 1888PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Error to St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Geo. W. Lubke, Judge. (1) The “ net income realized from the property as the rents,” was a subject of conveyance to secure payment of the mortgage debt. Rents to be acquired in the future,.as other future property, not yet in esse, but having a potential existence, are capable of being subject of agreement of sale and of mortgage. Holroyd r.

Read the full summary

Error to St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Geo. W. Lubke, Judge. (1) The “ net income realized from the property as the rents,” was a subject of conveyance to secure payment of the mortgage debt. Rents to be acquired in the future,.as other future property, not yet in esse, but having a potential existence, are capable of being subject of agreement of sale and of mortgage. Holroyd r. Marshall, 10 H. L. Cas. 191; Jessup v. Bridge, 11 Iowa, 572 ; Dunham v. Isett, 15 Iowa, 284 ; Railroad v. Menzies, 26 111. 121; Pulían v. Railroad, 5 Biss. 237 ; 2 Story Eq. Jur., secs. 1021, 1231; Regard v.…

1Opinion of the CourtBlack, J.

The petitioner, M. A. Rosenblatt, filed two applications in the matter of the Life Association of America, asking that the superintendent of insurance be required to pay to him the net rents arising from property known as the Masonic Building. The court declined to make the orders prayed for, or either of them, and he appealed.

These claims for the rents grow out of the following agreed facts : The Masonic Hall Association owned a parcel of ground in St. Louis, and the building thereon ; and on the first of June, 1869, made a deed of trust to secure the payment of one hundred and forty bonds…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Gilman v. Illinois and Mississippi Telegraph Company. Coykendall, Garnishee v. IdemSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
  2. American Bridge Co. v. HeidelbachSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
  3. White v. WearMissouri Court of Appeals · 1877

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Wolff v. WardSupreme Court of Missouri · 1891
  2. Fontaine v. Schulenburg & Boeckler Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1891
  3. Armour Packing Co. v. Wolff & Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1894
  4. St. Louis National Bank v. FieldSupreme Court of Missouri · 1900
  5. Pence v. Gabbert's AdministratorMissouri Court of Appeals · 1897

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API