Pike v. Gleason
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Jones Cvrcuit Gowrt. Actions to foreclose separate mortgages. There was a decree in each case granting the relief prayed for in the respective petitions. Defendants in each case appeal.
1Opinion of the CourtBeck, J.
I. Each of these cases rests upon substantially the same facts. They were tried upon the same testimony and are submitted together in this court. The controlling facts of the respective cases, so far as it becomes necessary to state *151them, in view of the questions upon which our decision is based, are these: Griswold and wife executed the mortgages in suit. The mortgage involved in the second action was given to Huber, those in the first and third, to Crosby. Huber transferred the mortgage executed to him, with the note which it was given to secure, to Crosby, who afterwards transferred it,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Wickersham v. ReevesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1855
- Linscott v. LamartSupreme Court of Iowa · 1877
- First National Bank of Waterloo v. ElmoreSupreme Court of Iowa · 1879
- Woodward v. DavisSupreme Court of Iowa · 1880
3Cited by5 opinions
- Hill v. PrestonTexas Supreme Court · 1931
- York v. RobbinsTexas Commission of Appeals · 1923
- C. M. Hapgood Shoe Co. v. First National BankCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1900
- Henningsmeyer v. First State Bank of ConroeCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1916
- Hill v. PrestonTexas Supreme Court · 1931