Legal Opinion

Shockley v. Roelli

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided January 12, 1926PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtVinje, C. J.

The facts found by the trial court are sustained by the evidence, and the only question raised by the appeal is one of law. Are the Olsons personally liable for a deficiency judgment? They claim they are not because no deed assuming liability of the mortgage was executed or. delivered to them. 'The defense fails for two reasons: First, the agreement to pay a mortgage need not be in the deed. It may be in a separate instrument. Here it was contained in the land contract. That was sufficient. 4 Ballard, Ann. Law Real Prop. sec. 535; 3 Tiffany, Real Prop. (2d ed.) § 623; 14 Ballard, Real Prop. §…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Webster v. TibbitsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1865

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Linbrook Realty Corp. v. RogersSupreme Court of Virginia · 1932
  2. Swain v. Virginia Bank & Trust Co.Court of Appeals of Virginia · 1928
  3. Capital City Lumber Co. v. OlsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1926

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

Powered by the Exa API