Pepper v. Haight
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action brought by the plaintiff as administrator of-Phillips, deceased, to foreclose a mortgage. The defendants Haight and wife alone defended. They set up that the mortgage was subject to a condition, which was recited in it, and in the answer. The condition, among other things, stated that Haight had, on the day of the date of the mortgage, purchased of Phillips the premises described in it, being 101-2- acres of land.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action brought by the plaintiff as administrator of-Phillips, deceased, to foreclose a mortgage. The defendants Haight and wife alone defended. They set up that the mortgage was subject to a condition, which was recited in it, and in the answer. The condition, among other things, stated that Haight had, on the day of the date of the mortgage, purchased of Phillips the premises described in it, being 101-2- acres of land. That from three to five acres of the land were in the possession of one Philip Ellsworth, and was claimed as the property of said Philip or the heirs of John 0.…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, C. L. Allen, J.
The learned justice who tried the action, passed upon all the questions of fact, and as I understand from reading .the case, found that the piece of land designated in the mortgage as the disputed part of the premises, consisting of from three to five acres of land, was that part in possession of Philip Ellsworth at the time of the execution of the mortgage, and lying north of the road a a. I do not see how he could well come to "any other conclusion. The words in the condition itself, recited in the mortgage, are that “from 3 to 5 acres of said land is in the…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Nellis v. ClarkNew York Supreme Court · 1838
- Lawrence v. BarkerNew York Supreme Court · 1830
- Hyslop & Cambpell v. ClarkeNew York Supreme Court · 1817
- Rogers v. KneelandNew York Supreme Court · 1833
- Barton v. Port Jackson & Union Falls Plank Road Co.New York Supreme Court · 1854
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Kauffman v. RaederCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1901
- Melchoir v. McCartyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1872
- Merritt v. MillardNew York Court of Appeals · 1868
- Union Pac. Ry. Co. v. Travelers' Ins.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1897
- Cornwell v. ClementNew York Supreme Court · 1895
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.