Merkle v. Beidleman
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the defendants, James F. Beidleman and others, from a judgment of the Supreme'Court in favor of the plaintiff,, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Chemung on the-6th day of October, 1897, upon the decision of the court rendered after a trial at the Chemung Special Term.
Read the full summary
Appeal by the defendants, James F. Beidleman and others, from a judgment of the Supreme'Court in favor of the plaintiff,, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Chemung on the-6th day of October, 1897, upon the decision of the court rendered after a trial at the Chemung Special Term. In March, 1885, the defendants and appellants,. James F. Beidleman and Maria, his wife, executed and delivered a bond and. mortgage for the sum of $700 to Eliza Beidleman, the-aunt of James F. Beidleman. In July, 1895, Eliza Beidleman assigned such bond and mortgage to the plaintiff:, John D. Merkle.…
1Opinion of the Court
Herrick, J.:
“ By repeated decisions of this court the doctrine is established that the assignee of a mortgage takes it subject" to all of the equities existing between the original .parties thereto, and, so far as the remedy thereon is concerned, stands precisely in the shoes of his assignor.” (Bennett v. Bates, 94 N. Y. 354.)
The claim of the defendant in this case is that, for services rendered and to be rendered by him to the mortgagee, it was agreed that the bond and mortgage in question should be surrendered to. him; and that he rendered and performed such services..
Practically, the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Schafer v. . ReillyNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
- Bennett v. . BatesNew York Court of Appeals · 1884
- Von Sachs v. . KretzNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
- Lyon v. . RickerNew York Court of Appeals · 1894
- Hill v. . HooleNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.