Bickford v. Daniels
Superior Court of New Hampshire
An administratrix may sustain a writ of entry to foreclose a mortgage to her intes* ‘W hen writings are offered as evidence of a mortgage, the question whether they amount to a mortgage or an absolute conveyance, must be settled on common law principles, A wmitig of defeazance, never delivered to the grantor in a deed, but deposited with a third person tobe delivered on a condition, which the grantor never performed, does not. render the deed a mortgage. special non est…
Read the full summary
An administratrix may sustain a writ of entry to foreclose a mortgage to her intes* ‘W hen writings are offered as evidence of a mortgage, the question whether they amount to a mortgage or an absolute conveyance, must be settled on common law principles, A wmitig of defeazance, never delivered to the grantor in a deed, but deposited with a third person tobe delivered on a condition, which the grantor never performed, does not. render the deed a mortgage. special non est factum is an unnecessary pleaand when the demandant does not count on a mortgage, the question, whether his title is or is…
1Opinion of the Court
Woodbury, J.*
The demandant, counting as administra-trix, cannot recover the land in dispute, unless her title to it is founded on a mortgage to her intestate.(1) 2 Vent. 20,-4 Coke 95.- 2 Es. Di, 144.— i Mass, Rep. 204.— 4 ditto 358. (2) 1 N. H. Laws 2 i 1,217, 219,227,230.-3 Mass. Rep. 258, Dean vs. Dean. (3) 1 N H. Rep. 39, 361. Lund vs. Lund.
Because the -title to the real estate of intestates vests in their heirs and not in their personal representatives; and hence, as a general rule, all actions concerning such estate must be instituted in the name of the heirs.(1)
To this rule the only…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Catlin v. Jackson ex dem. GratzCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1811
- Robbins v. LuceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1808
- Mounsey v. DrakeNew York Supreme Court · 1813
- Dean v. DeanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1807
- Thompson v. KetchamNew York Supreme Court · 1809
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Southerin v. MendumSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1831
- Gibson v. BaileySuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1838
- Briggs v. SholesSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1843
- Moore v. EstySuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1831
- Comtois v. MAK Investments, LLC (In Re Comtois)United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Hampshire · 2007
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.