McFadden v. Rogers
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Bates Circuit Court. — Hon. W. S. Shirk, Judge. If plaintiff has any equitable right to this land, he got it by the mortgage from Worley, and he could not acquire any greater or other equity than Worley would be entitled to, standing as he does as assignee of Worley.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Bates Circuit Court. — Hon. W. S. Shirk, Judge. If plaintiff has any equitable right to this land, he got it by the mortgage from Worley, and he could not acquire any greater or other equity than Worley would be entitled to, standing as he does as assignee of Worley. And it cannot be assumed that Worley could, in equity, force Rogers to convey by another deed of correct description, after the note was due, without tendering payment of the note or purchase money agreed to be paid. Before a party can ask a court of equity to his aid, he must do equity. 1 Story Eq. Jur., §§ 6, 7.…
1Opinion of the Court
Henry, J. —
This was a proceeding in equity, by which McFadden sought to correct certain deeds executed by defendants, and to divest Wm. Rogers- of the title to the tract of land hereinafter described. The petition alleged that on the 3rd day of June, 1869, the defendant, Wm. Rogers, sold to his co-defendant, his daughter Rachel Worley, the south half of lot 2, of the northwest quarter of section 20, township 40 range 33, in Bates county, but by mistake in the deed he executed, the land was described as the southwest quarter of the northwest quarter of said *424section, township and range; that…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Golden v. TyerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1904
- Young v. HydeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1914
- A. C. Drinkwater Jr., Farms, Inc. v. Ellot H. Raffety Farms, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1973
- Payne v. KingMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910