Davis v. Hulett
Supreme Court of Vermont
Bill in Chancery. - Heard on demurrer, September Term, 1885, Walker, Chancellor. Demurrer, pro forma, without argument, sustained. The premises deeded to the defendant, and encumbered by the two mortgages described in the opinion, were situated in the State of Massachusetts.
Read the full summary
Bill in Chancery. - Heard on demurrer, September Term, 1885, Walker, Chancellor. Demurrer, pro forma, without argument, sustained. The premises deeded to the defendant, and encumbered by the two mortgages described in the opinion, were situated in the State of Massachusetts. Whenever the mortgage debt forms a part of the consideration of the purchase, although the purchaser has not entered into any covenant or agreement to pay it, he is bound to the extent of the property to indemnify the grantor. The law implies a promise to that effect from the nature of the transaction. 1 Jones Mort. ss.…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Royce, Oh. J.
This cause was heard on demurrer to the bill. The first question made by the defendant in argument *93is a jurisdictional one. The facts alleged in the bill are admitted by the demurrer, and the right of the orators to come into this court for relief depends upon the character of the allegations made in the bill, and the relief prayed for.
It is admitted that on the 9th day of February, 1881. one Owen M. Kane executed a mortgage deed to the oratrix of certain premises situate in Rutland, in the county of Worcester, to secure the payment of…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Brownson v. HannahSupreme Court of Florida · 1927
- Tuttle v. JockmusSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1927
- Federal Land Bank v. PollenderSupreme Court of Vermont · 1979
- Hyland's Estate v. Foote's EstateSupreme Court of Vermont · 1933
- Congregational Society v. FlaggSupreme Court of Vermont · 1900
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.