Legal Opinion

Farmer v. Ward

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided October 31, 1908PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Final hearing on bill, answer, replication and agreed state of the case.

1Opinion of the Court

Stjívgnson, Y. C.

My conclusions in the above-stated cause may be briefly stated as follows:

1. I think that the Martin act impliedly excludes the mortgagee from becoming a purchaser so as to be able to cut off the equity of redemption by notice. Under what I think is a well-settled rule, the mortgagee prior to sale may pay the taxes which the owner of the equity of redemption was primarily liable to pay, and thereby acquire by a species of subrogation a lien for the amount so paid, which, in respect of priority, occupies the same position as the tax lien. Manning v. Tuthill, 30 N. J. Eq. (3…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Sidenberg v. . ElyNew York Court of Appeals · 1882

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Equitable Trust Co. of New York v. KelseyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1911
  2. Bluestone Bldg. Loan Assn. v. GlasserNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1934
  3. South Amboy Trust Co. v. McMichael Holdings, Inc.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1947
  4. Ripley v. SchenckNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1924
  5. Merewood, Inc. v. DenshawNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1947

4 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