Peaslee v. Evans
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
1Opinion of the CourtPeaslee, C. J.
The statute relating to mortgages to secure future advances (P. S., c. 139, s. 3) does not require that money promised to be paid shall be advanced when the mortgage is given. If the event upon which the money is to be paid at a later date is fully agreed upon, a present mortgage to secure a note for the agreed sum is valid if the event afterwards occurs and payment is made as agreed. The statute does not apply to such a mortgage. Future payments are not always future advances. No one would think that a mortgage to protect a surety was invalid under this statute because the payments by the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Ladue v. Detroit & Milwaukee RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1865
- Hyman v. . HauffNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
- Gray v. McClellanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1913
- Gerrity v. Wareham Savings BankMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
- Whelan v. Exchange Trust Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1913
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- L. M. Sullivan Co. v. Essex Broadway Savings BankSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1977
- Leroux v. Bank of New Hampshire, N.A.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1989
- Messier v. LedouxSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1933
- North American Manufacturing, Inc. v. Crown International, Inc.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1975