Legal Opinion · Dissent

Spaulding v. Quincy Trust Co.

Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division

Decided October 28, 1942Published

1DissentAdlow, J.

I cannot agree with the opinion of the majority. The finding for the plaintiff is based on the court’s ruling that the merger of the title with the mortgage interest extinguished the mortgages. While the propriety of the court’s ruling is open to question, in view of the specific mention in the advertisement that the interest to be sold was subject to three mortgages of $5000. each, it is unnecessary to consider it here. Even if the mortgages, were extinguished! *447by the foreclosure, the event would not extinguish the debts for which the mortgages were security. Sullivan v. Neary, 186 Mass.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Johnston v. CassidyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1932
  2. Chute v. CroninMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1930
  3. Dillon v. LangeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1932
  4. Steiner v. SchrankMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1925
  5. Sullivan v. NearyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1904

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API