Omaly v. Swan
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts
Assumpsit [by Michael Omaly against James Swan] to recover the amount of a simple contract debt, due to the plaintiff, for which a mortgage had been given as collateral security.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit [by Michael Omaly against James Swan] to recover the amount of a simple contract debt, due to the plaintiff, for which a mortgage had been given as collateral security. The plaintiff had foreclosed the mortgage and taken possession of the mortgaged premises; and now sought to recover the balance of the debt, deducting the value of the mortgaged premises at the time of the foreclosure. , admitted that the only question in the cause was, whether the plaintiff was entitled by law to recover such balance. stated, that the point had been repeatedly decided in favour of the right of the…
1Opinion of the Court
STORY, Circuit Justice.
This question has been long since settled by the local law. In Amory v. Fairbanks, 3 Mass. 562, the supreme court of this state affirmed the right; and this court afterwards, in Hatch v. White [Case No. 6,209], recognised the same doctrine. It is too late now to controvert it. Judgment for the plaintiff.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Amory v. FairbanksMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1793
3Cited by5 opinions
- Webber v. BlancSupreme Court of Florida · 1897
- Voorhis v. CrutcherSupreme Court of Florida · 1929
- Porter v. PillsburySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1853
- Bliss v. WeilWisconsin Supreme Court · 1861
- Hunt v. StilesSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1839