Rackliffe v. Seal
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to Hannibal Court of Common Pleas. I. The mistake on the face of the mortgage being clear, and the mortgage itself also showing beyond all doubt to whom the lot was intended to be conveyed, so that no one could be misled or deceived thereby, it was the manifest duty of the court below to disregard the mistake on the trial, and do substantial justice to the parties without delay.
Read the full summary
Error to Hannibal Court of Common Pleas. I. The mistake on the face of the mortgage being clear, and the mortgage itself also showing beyond all doubt to whom the lot was intended to be conveyed, so that no one could be misled or deceived thereby, it was the manifest duty of the court below to disregard the mistake on the trial, and do substantial justice to the parties without delay. There is, therefore, no error in the court' below in admitting the mortgage deed to be read in evidence. (1 & 2 Prest, on Abst. 62; 2 Prest, on Conv. 432-38 & 35; 3 & 4 Green’s Crui. 308; 2 Yent. 141; Coles v.…
1Opinion of the CourtLovelace, Judge
This is an action to foreclose a mortgage. The plaintiff alleges that the mortgage was executed by A. R. Seal and wife to James Raekliffe. The mortgage deed begins by stating that it is made “ by and between Amer R. Seal and Elizabeth J., his wife, of the first part, and James Raekliffe, of the second part; and after acknowledging the receipt of the consideration, it proceeds to grant, bargain and sell to the said Seal, his heirs and assigns, and the habendum is to have and hold, <fec., to the said Seal, &c. The conditions then go on to recite certain notes due by Seal to Raekliffe, and says…
2Cited by3 opinions
- People v. BarltzMichigan Supreme Court · 1920
- Arnett v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1910
- Jones v. ShepleySupreme Court of Missouri · 1886