Union Insurance v. Van Rensselaer
New York Court of Chancery
The bill in this case was filed to foreclose a mortgage, exeecuted by P. Van Rensselaer and wife to the complainants. All the defendants were made parties as claimants upon the equity of redemption only, and none of them contested the right of the complainants to a foreclosure and sale of the mortgaged premises for the purpose of satisfying their mortgage.
Read the full summary
The bill in this case was filed to foreclose a mortgage, exeecuted by P. Van Rensselaer and wife to the complainants. All the defendants were made parties as claimants upon the equity of redemption only, and none of them contested the right of the complainants to a foreclosure and sale of the mortgaged premises for the purpose of satisfying their mortgage. The guardian ad litem of the infant defendants claimed an extra allowance, for counsel fees on a motion to correct the master’s report of the amount due. Trotter and Douglass, two of the defendants who were judgment creditors of the…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
By the present practice of this court, in mortgage cases, those defendants whose claims are upon the equity of redemption merely, and who have no right or interest in the mortgaged premises in opposition to the complainant’s claim, are not permitted to litigate their respective claims to the surplus, as between themselves, before it is ascertained that there will be a surplus over and above the complainants’ debt and costs, except where their liens are upon different parcels of the mortgaged premises. And if the bill is properly framed, containing only a general allegation that…
2Cited by25 opinions
- Downing v. . MarshallNew York Court of Appeals · 1867
- Matter of Application of HoldenNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Frame v. PlumbWisconsin Supreme Court · 1909
- Livingston v. WardNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Tyson v. RichardsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1899
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.