Pollock v. Morton

SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

The final judgment granting the appellee Morton a so-called, but wholly misnamed “equitable lien” on property titled in a corporation in which he held, to say the least, a substantial interest, T & M Investments, Inc.,1 is completely unsupportable2 and is consequently reversed. Of the numerous reasons which may properly be assigned for this result, we refer only to the most obvious:

1. The basis for Morton’s claim— that, without either receiving a mortgage from, or agreeing to the existence of such an interest with T & M — he advanced money to the corporation for that…