Sabatino v. D'Aloise

It is suggested in Tate v. Security Trust Co., 63 N.J. Eq. 559 (at p. 561), that there is some conflict of the authorities in this state touching the equitable rights subject to which an assignee of a mortgage will or will not take; but I think an examination of all the authorities in this state on that subject discloses a clearly defined and established rule which cannot be mistaken and which may be accurately applied to any given facts. That rule, expressed both exclusively and inclusively, in essentially the language adopted in Vredenburgh v. Burnet, 31 N.J. Eq. 229, may be said to be as…