Legal Opinion

Sellers v. Botsford

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided November 25, 1862PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Appeal in Chancery from Livingston Circuit. Sellers filed his bill to foreclose a mortgage given to him by Samuel and Sarah Burley for money loaned. Bots-ford was made a defendant as subsequent purchaser. The ■defendants set up the defense of usury. It appeared in evidence that Botsford purchased the mortgaged premises •of the mortgagors, subject to the mortgage, and agreed to pay it up.

Read the full summary

Appeal in Chancery from Livingston Circuit. Sellers filed his bill to foreclose a mortgage given to him by Samuel and Sarah Burley for money loaned. Bots-ford was made a defendant as subsequent purchaser. The ■defendants set up the defense of usury. It appeared in evidence that Botsford purchased the mortgaged premises •of the mortgagors, subject to the mortgage, and agreed to pay it up. The Circuit Court in Chancery granted ■decree in favor of complainant for the whole face of the mortgage. Botsford alone appealed.

1Opinion of the Court

Manning J.:

Conceding the usury set up in the answer, which we do-not think established by the evidence- — -the appellant, who is a subsequent purchaser of the mortgaged premises, can not avail himself of it as a defense to the mortgage, or turn it to his individual benefit. By tbe agreement between him and the mortgagor when he purchased he was to pay the mortgage. Its payment was a part of the consideration or purchase price he was to pay for the land. On this ground, if no other, he should not be permitted to-set up usury in tbe contract between the mortgagor and mortgagee. In the case of…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Farmers' & Mechanics' Bank v. KimmelMichigan Supreme Court · 1848

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Key West Wharf & Coal Co. v. PorterSupreme Court of Florida · 1912
  2. Central Holding Co. v. BushmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1927
  3. Barney v. Tontine Surety Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1902
  4. Gray v. H. M. Loud & Sons Lumber Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1901
  5. Tuxedo Enterprises, Inc. v. Detroit Trust Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1935

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API