Ewing v. Shelton
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Common Pleas. I. This action being to recover a penalty, a quasi criminal proceeding, the statute should be strictly construed. The statute provides (sec. 21, Mortgages, R. C. 1855, p. 1091) “ that if any mortgagee, trustee, cestui que trust, his executor, or administrator, or assignee, receive full satisfaction of any mortgage or deed of trust, he shall acknowledge satisfaction,” &g.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Common Pleas. I. This action being to recover a penalty, a quasi criminal proceeding, the statute should be strictly construed. The statute provides (sec. 21, Mortgages, R. C. 1855, p. 1091) “ that if any mortgagee, trustee, cestui que trust, his executor, or administrator, or assignee, receive full satisfaction of any mortgage or deed of trust, he shall acknowledge satisfaction,” &g. The true and proper construction óf which is, that the legal assignee, and not merely the equitable assignee, is the proper one to acknowledge satisfaction. The statute intended…
1Opinion of the CourtDryden, Judge
The plaintiff being indebted by note in the sum of $2,600 to Asa S. Jones, conveyed certain real estate in the county of St. Louis to Eleazer Sherman, in trust to secure the payment of said debt. The trust deed was duly recorded in the proper i*ecorder’s office, and the trust debt was duly assigned by Jones to the defendant Shelton, to whom, after maturity of the debt, the plaintiff made payment. After payment the plaintiff requsted the defendant to acknowledge satisfaction on the margin of the record of the deed, or deliver him a sufficient deed of release ; but he refused, and, continuing…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Hagerman v. SuttonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1887
- Joerdens v. SchrimpfSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
- Daniels v. DensmoreNebraska Supreme Court · 1891
- Wing v. Union Central Life InsuranceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1914
- Henry v. OrearMissouri Court of Appeals · 1904