Legal Opinion

Montana Nat. Bank v. Schmidt

Montana Supreme Court

Decided January 15, 1887PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Appeal from Third District, Lewis and Clarice County.

1Opinion of the CourtBach, J.

The complaint in this cause shows that this action was brought to reform and foreclose a mortgage executed by John M. Schmidt, in his life-time, and Elizabeth Schmidt, his wife, to secure a promissory note given by John M. Schmidt to George Steell, and by Steell assigned to plaintiff. There was an ■ erroneous description of the premises intended to be mortgaged, in this: the land intended to be mortgaged was described as being situated in township No. 2, instead of township No. 20, as the same was-intended (as alleged in the complaint) by the parties thereto. The answer denies the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Leonis v. LazzarovichCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
  2. Petesch v. HambachWisconsin Supreme Court · 1880
  3. Heaton v. FrybergerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1874
  4. Barrett v. TewksburyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
  5. Hayford v. KocherCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Stealey v. LyonsWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1946
  2. American Savings & Loan Ass'n v. BurghardtMontana Supreme Court · 1897
  3. Wiseman v. CrislipWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1913

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

Powered by the Exa API