Peters v. Bossman

It is undisputed that plaintiff’s purchase-money mortgage was duly recorded at the time the defendant Julius O. Bossman entered into possession of the farm pursuant to the conveyance of it to him by plaintiff, and that the said defendant remained in continuous possession of the said farm until long after the completion of the work.

It is claimed in support of the conclusion reached by the *256trial court that the conceded general rule that plaintiff’s mortgage, duly recorded and subsisting at the time the work was commenced and done upon the real estate, remains prior and superior to any claim of…