Verner v. Betz
Supreme Court of New Jersey
On appeal from a decree advised by Vice-Chancellor Bird, who filed the following conclusions: On this bill to foreclose and the answers and proofs, the question arises whether or not the complainant has any remedy against a dwelling-house which was removed without the consent of the mortgagee from the premises, included and described in his mortgage, after the execution of the mortgage, to another lot of land near by, which, after such removal, was purchased and owned by the…
Read the full summary
On appeal from a decree advised by Vice-Chancellor Bird, who filed the following conclusions: On this bill to foreclose and the answers and proofs, the question arises whether or not the complainant has any remedy against a dwelling-house which was removed without the consent of the mortgagee from the premises, included and described in his mortgage, after the execution of the mortgage, to another lot of land near by, which, after such removal, was purchased and owned by the defendant, the mortgagor, and then sold by him to the defendant Verner. The land upon which the house was so erected,…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Scudder, J.
The exact form in which this decree is made, for the removal of the house back to the mortgaged premises from which it was taken, is, so far as my examination of the authorities has gone, without precedent. But this may be not objectionable if, in administering equitable relief, it be found necessary to apply a remedy which is unusual. The design of the bill is to restore to the mortgagee his security, which he alleges has been taken from him by the severance of the dwelling-house from the land covered by his mortgage and its annexation to…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Gardner v. HearttNew York Supreme Court · 1846
- Gooding v. SheaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
- Hutchins v. KingSupreme Court of the United States · 1864
- Buckout v. SwiftCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
- Lane v. HitchcockNew York Supreme Court · 1817
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Sears, Roebuck Co. v. CampSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1938
- Camden Trust Co. v. HandleNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1941
- First Nat. Bank v. Hager Oil Co.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1929