Legal Opinion

Hoover v. Johnson

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 1, 1891PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Appeal by plaintiff from a judgment of the district court for Hen-'nepin county, entered pursuant to an order by Hooker, J., granting -defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings.

1Opinion of the CourtVanderburgh, J.

The defendant, first mortgagee, duly foreclosed his mortgage* and bid in. the mortgaged premises at the sum of *435$9,078.94, July 29, 1889. The plaintiff, as second mortgagee, was entitled to redeem under the statute in case the mortgagor did not, and, as to him, the time of redemption would have expired on the 3d day of August, 1890. It is, however, alleged in the complaint that prior to that time plaintiff agreed to extend the time of redemption to August 28th, and afterwards again agreed to a further extension for a reasonable time after the last date. On the 1st day of September, the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Tice v. RussellSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Orr v. SuttonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
  2. Bartleson v. MunsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1908
  3. State ex rel. Anderson v. KerrSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
  4. Haynes v. RosenfieldSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1924

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

Powered by the Exa API