Marsh v. Rice
Superior Court of New Hampshire
THIS was a writ of entry, tried here at the last term upon the general issue, when a verdict was taken for the tenant, by consent, subject to the opinion of the court upon the fallowing case : One Silas Whitcomb, being seized in fee, on the 1st of November, 1810, conveyed the demanded premises to a Mr, Harriman, to hold in fee and in mortgage ; and on the 16th of April, 1814, made another mortgage of the same premises to Joshua Darling, Esq.
Read the full summary
THIS was a writ of entry, tried here at the last term upon the general issue, when a verdict was taken for the tenant, by consent, subject to the opinion of the court upon the fallowing case : One Silas Whitcomb, being seized in fee, on the 1st of November, 1810, conveyed the demanded premises to a Mr, Harriman, to hold in fee and in mortgage ; and on the 16th of April, 1814, made another mortgage of the same premises to Joshua Darling, Esq. On the 9 th of October, 1815, Betsey Hat horn, then sole, but now the wife of the demandant Marsh, having obtained an execution in her favor against…
1Per curiam
It is unnecessary in this case to determine the legal effect of Marsh’s assent to Rice’s purchase of the demanded premises ; nor need-we determine -whether this action could have been maintained, even if Whitcomb had *169satisfied the two mortgages with his own money, and pro-cored them to be discharged, and then conveyed the premises to Rice, because we are very well satisfied that Rice must be considered as the assignee of Harriman and Darling, and that as such he is entitled to retain possession until he shall receive the amount due upon the two mortgages, in the same manner as if the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Clark v. MunroeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1817
3Cited by2 opinions
- Runlet v. OtisSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1820
- United States v. Boston & Berlin Transportation Co.District Court, D. New Hampshire · 1964