Stafford v. Van Rensselaer
Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors
On appeal from the court of Chancery, The cause was argued and decided here, upon the case and points presented in the report of the case below. (1 Hopk. Ch. Rep. 569 to 573, S. C.) Sandford, Chancellor, assigned the reasons for the decree of the court below, as in 1 Hopk. Ch. Rep. 573 to 575. The cause was argued here by
1Opinion of the Court
*Sutherland, J.
(After stating the facts.) As between the respondent and Van Deusen, if Van Deusen had continued to be the owner of the smaller mortgage, there can be no question of the respondent’s equitable title to a priority of satisfaction.
The original agreement between the respondent and Van Deusen was, that the balance of the consideration money not paid down, should be secured by a mortgage upon the premises; and the substituted arrangement was evidently for the accommodation of Van Deusen, and, as is admitted, at his solicitation. It is manifest that it was not the inten tion of the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Bayley v. GreenleafSupreme Court of the United States · 1822
- In re ClohertyWashington Supreme Court · 1891
- Banner v. MayWashington Supreme Court · 1891
- Hundley v. LyonsSupreme Court of Virginia · 1817
- Frear v. EvertsonNew York Supreme Court · 1822
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.