Legal Opinion · Dissent

Merritt v. Gibson

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided March 17, 1891No. 15,920Published

From the Switzerland Circuit Court.

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion.

Elliott, J. —

I can not assent to the conclusion that where mortgaged property is not of value sufficient to satisfy the judgment embodied in a decree of foreclosure the mortgagee may, upon showing that fact, have a receiver appointed to collect the rent during the year allowed for redemption, for I think that the mere fact that the mortgaged property is not of value sufficient to satisfy the judgment does not authorize the appointment of a receiver. I do not ■doubt that there may be cases where a receiver can be appointed, but I do believe that to justify the exercise of…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Bronson v. KinzieSupreme Court of the United States · 1843
  2. Brine v. Insurance Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1878
  3. Teal v. WalkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  4. Hervey v. KrostIndiana Supreme Court · 1888
  5. Horn v. Indianapolis National BankIndiana Supreme Court · 1890

11 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