Legal Opinion

Domeyer v. O'Connell

Illinois Supreme Court

Decided October 27, 1936No. 22999. Reversed and remandedPublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Stone

The question involved in this case concerns the distribution of the proceeds of a sale of mortgaged property where such proceeds are not sufficient to pay all notes executed with the mortgage.

Dora and John Wetzel executed- to the First Trust and Savings Bank of Sterling thirty-two promissory notes aggregating $35,000, bearing the same maturity date, and secured them by a mortgage deed to the bank. Neither the notes nor mortgage contained any parity clause as to payment. Prior to their maturity all except $6000 of the notes were sold and assigned by the bank to various assignees who are…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Decatur Lumber & Manufacturing Co. v. CrailIllinois Supreme Court · 1932
  2. Green v. Ashland Sixty-Third State BankIllinois Supreme Court · 1931
  3. Cullum v. ErwinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1842
  4. Lawson v. WarrenSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
  5. Keyes v. Wood, Grant & Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1849

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. Herlihy Mid-Continent Co. v. Sanitary DistrictIllinois Supreme Court · 1945
  2. Orchards v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1984
  3. Wm. J. Lemp Brewing Co. v. Ems Brewing Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1947
  4. Title Guarantee & Trust Co. v. Mortgage CommissionNew York Court of Appeals · 1937
  5. Traff v. FabroAppellate Court of Illinois · 1949

24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API