Bank v. Brooks
Superior Court of New Hampshire
When a debtor owns in land, set off under an extent, a less interest than thru which was appraised and returned, all the interest, which he actually owned will pass to the creditor.
Read the full summary
When a debtor owns in land, set off under an extent, a less interest than thru which was appraised and returned, all the interest, which he actually owned will pass to the creditor. In our statute, eiviníí; a new execution where the “ estate” extended did not belong ?a the iuiL1 ofnt debtor, the word, “ estate,” means as well the quantity of inter* o'* in the In >d as the land itself; and a scire facías lies for a new execution Jm ' !• 'bin ..nice in value between the “ estate” setoff, and the “estate” actu-ad'- oi-iul by the debtor, whether that difference arise from a total failure of tub*…
1Opinion of the CourtWoodbury, J.
The plaintiffs contend, that, as the whole quantity of interest, set off by the appraisers in these premises, did not pass, nothing could pass under the extent; and consequently, that a new execution ought to issue for the ■whole sum at which the premises were valued.
But we arc inclined to think, that a mis-description of the quantity of interest, actually owned by the debtor in the premises, if the error consist only in calling it too much, will not prevent such interest from passing as the debtor had. Omne majas continet in sc minus.(1)
Thus, in all conveyances by deed, every interest owned…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Leland v. StoneMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1813
- Waldo v. LongNew York Supreme Court · 1810