Weed v. Covill
New York Supreme Court
The complaint in this case was on a chattel mortgage, dated November 19th, 1831, due on the 1st of January, 1833, and it alledged that the defendant had used up and disposed of the property mortgaged, that no part of the money had been paid, and demanded the sum secured by the mortgage, and interest from date.
Read the full summary
The complaint in this case was on a chattel mortgage, dated November 19th, 1831, due on the 1st of January, 1833, and it alledged that the defendant had used up and disposed of the property mortgaged, that no part of the money had been paid, and demanded the sum secured by the mortgage, and interest from date. The terms of the mortgage were not given, but a copy of it was attached to the complaint, and marked A.; but the complaint did not refer to that. . The defendant demurred, and referred in his demurrer to the copy of the mortgage annexed to the complaint. By that it appeared that the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Hand, J.
Considering the mortgage as before the court, there is no agreement to pay the sum of §110, or any part of it. There is no recital or declaration in the in*243strument that the defendant was personally indebted to the plaintiff. And even the complaint does not so state. There is, therefore, no implied covenant to pay any thing. It is merely a mortgage, without any personal liability. And the case of Culver v. Sisson, (3 Comst. 264,) seems to be conclusive against the plaintiff.
[Fulton General Term, September 6, 1852.
Willard, Hand, Cady and C. L. Allen, Justices.]
The…
2Cited by6 opinions
- North-Western Mutual Life Insurance v. MooneyNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
- Brookings v. WhiteSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1862
- Coleman v. RensselaerNew York Supreme Court · 1873
- Haskins v. KellyThe Superior Court of New York City · 1863
- Jewett v. BrownellNew York Supreme Court · 1889
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.