Warren v. Cochran
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Trespass. The parties ágree that John Walker was seized of the premises in which the trespass is alleged to have been committed, on the 28th of February, 1840, and. on that day mortgaged the same to Daniel Walker, the consideration expressed in the mortgage deed being f 1,195. On the 14th of December, 1844, John Walker sold the premises, by deed of warranty, to Nathan Warren, the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Trespass. The parties ágree that John Walker was seized of the premises in which the trespass is alleged to have been committed, on the 28th of February, 1840, and. on that day mortgaged the same to Daniel Walker, the consideration expressed in the mortgage deed being f 1,195. On the 14th of December, 1844, John Walker sold the premises, by deed of warranty, to Nathan Warren, the plaintiff. Subsequent to the date of said mortage and deed, Daniel Walker died, and the defendant was appointed administrator of his estate. After the conveyance to Warren, one Ezra Carr bargained with him for the…
1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.
This case does not depend on any question as to the effect of a foreclosure under process of law. It is to be decided upon principles applicable to the earlier proceedings. The plaintiff alleges that he was a bona fide purchaser *341of this property, for an adequate valuable consideration, and is, therefore, entitled to inquire whether the mortgage under which the defendant claims was fraudulent. The defendant objects to this inquiry, because he alleges that he commenced and prosecuted a suit at law on his mortgage against the tenant, whom he found in possession, and recovered a judgment, and is…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Lawrence v. HaynesSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1829
- Thrasher v. HainesSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1822
3Cited by1 opinion
- King v. HopkinsSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1876