Coon v. Smith
New York Supreme Court
This is an action to foreclose a mortgage for the sum of $3,300, executed hy defendants, Rufus P. Smith and wife, to Julia A. Smith, the plaintiff’s testatrix, on the 31st day of March, 1883, on a farm situated in the town of Aneram, 27. T. On the 15th day of April, 1898, the mortgagors conveyed said mortgaged premises to the mortgagee, who thereupon took full possession thereof and remained in possession until her death.
Read the full summary
This is an action to foreclose a mortgage for the sum of $3,300, executed hy defendants, Rufus P. Smith and wife, to Julia A. Smith, the plaintiff’s testatrix, on the 31st day of March, 1883, on a farm situated in the town of Aneram, 27. T. On the 15th day of April, 1898, the mortgagors conveyed said mortgaged premises to the mortgagee, who thereupon took full possession thereof and remained in possession until her death. By the deed of conveyance from the mortgagors to the mortgagee it was provided that “ said mortgage was not to he considered as merged in that title, but was to be held as…
1Opinion of the CourtCochrane, J.
The general rule is that where the title to the land and the ownership of the mortgage debt become vested in the same person, the mortgage is thereby merged and extinguished. Thomas Mort. (2d ed.), 257.
*114It is also a well-settled rule, that when a greater and a less estate meet in the same person, equity will preserve them distinct, provided there is an express or implied intent to do so, and justice requires it. Spencer v. Ayrault, 10 N. Y. 204; Smith v. Roberts, 91 id. 475; Sheldon v. Edwards, 35 id. 279, 285.
In Clift v. White, 12 N. Y. 536, it is said in reference to this subject: “ That the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Weston v. LivezeySupreme Court of Colorado · 1909