Norma Mining Co. v. Mackay
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona; William H. Sawtelle, Judge. Suit by Hugh Mackay against the Norma Mining Company. From an order confirming a sale under decree of foreclosure, defendant appeals. This is an appeal from an order confirming a sale under a decree of foreclosure of two mortgages.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona; William H. Sawtelle, Judge. Suit by Hugh Mackay against the Norma Mining Company. From an order confirming a sale under decree of foreclosure, defendant appeals. This is an appeal from an order confirming a sale under a decree of foreclosure of two mortgages. The cause has been before this court before in the case of Norma Mining Company v. Mackay, 241 Fed. 640, 154 O. C. A. 398. The facts are these: On March 18, 1916, Mackay secured a judgment against the Norma Mining Company for $22,058.09, with interest and costs. On…
1Opinion of the CourtHunt, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). [1] We think that the notice was sufficient. The day and place of sale were given, and it was published that the sale would be between the legal hours of sale. The law fixed the legal hours as between 10 a.-m. and 4 p. m., and the presumption is that the sale was had between such hours. In Burr et al. v. Borden, 61 Ill. 389, where a sale was made under a mortgage contract, it was announced that sale would be held “on the first of March, 1860, between the hours of nine a. m. and four p. m.” Upon objection to such an advertisement, the court held that it was…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Pewabic Mining Co. v. MasonSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Bondurant v. BondurantIllinois Supreme Court · 1911
- Evans v. RobbersonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1887
- Burr v. BordenIllinois Supreme Court · 1871
- Jensen v. AndrewsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1917
3Cited by1 opinion
- Fox v. CurryMontana Supreme Court · 1934