Raynor v. Raynor
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment entered upon the trial of this action at a Special Term. Willett and Henry Raynor, mortgagees and grantees of Richard Raynor, not baying been served, the foreclosme as to them was simply void. ( Watson v. Spencer, 20 Wend., 260; Feed v. Marble, 10 Paige, 409.) The trust assignees of Willett and Henry Raynor were not made parties; nor was it necessary, because that assignment was never recorded.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment entered upon the trial of this action at a Special Term. Willett and Henry Raynor, mortgagees and grantees of Richard Raynor, not baying been served, the foreclosme as to them was simply void. ( Watson v. Spencer, 20 Wend., 260; Feed v. Marble, 10 Paige, 409.) The trust assignees of Willett and Henry Raynor were not made parties; nor was it necessary, because that assignment was never recorded. (See Laws of 1844, p. 529.) Therefore they were cut off, and that trust extinguished. But inasmuch as the creators of the trust, Willett and Henry Raynor, were not foreclosed or…
1Opinion of the Court
Smith, J.:
The action was brought to recover dower in an undivided half of a tract of land in the city of Syracuse, containing about one hundred and fifty-four acres. The facts found by the trial court, so far as they are material to the appeal, are as follows: The plaintiff is the widow of Willett Raynor. They were married in September, 1835, and he died in May, 1870. In March, 1840, Willett Raynor became seized of an undivided half of the land referred to, by a quit-claim deed from Richard Raynor to Henry Raynor and himself, expressing the consideration of $15,000. The deed was recorded in…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Merritt v. . BartholickNew York Court of Appeals · 1867
- Bell v. Mayor of New-YorkNew York Court of Chancery · 1843
- Denton v. NannyNew York Supreme Court · 1850
- Platt v. . LottNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
- Battle v. . CoitNew York Court of Appeals · 1863
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.