Legal Opinion

Cooper v. Wagner

Ohio Court of Appeals

Decided May 29, 1933No. 4314Published

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

By ROSS, J.

There is no question that the better rule is that a foreclosure proceeding is no bar to a concurrence or successive suit upon a purchase money note secured by mortgage or vendor’s lien, unless it appears that the note has been paid by a satisfaction of a judgment or through the sale of the property in such proceeding. 19 R.Q.L., pages 509 to 512, §§305, 306, 307, 308, 309.

It is also well-settled that payment is a substantive defense and must be pleaded in order to be proved. Worst v Colonial Savings Bank & Trust Co., 11 Oh Ap, 308.

Payment was not alleged or claimed by the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Union Savings & Loan Co. v. KupetzOhio Court of Appeals · 1930

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API