Cobb v. Bord
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by plaintiff from a judgment of the district court for Hennepin county, where the action (brought to determine defendant’s adverse claim to land in Minneapolis) was tried by Hicks, J. The court found the first attempted foreclosure was void because of the defect mentioned in the opinion, and because the notice of sale was published only 41 days.
1Opinion of the CourtGileillan, C. J.
In 1857, one JB'. H. Cobb, then the owner of the land in controversy, executed to one Hall a mortgage thereon, to secure his promissory note to' the mortgagee, which mortgage had the usual power of sale, and was duly recorded. Afterwards Hall executed to one Martin a power of attorney to do certain things for him, which was duly recorded. The power did not authorize Martin to assign this mortgage, but he had, otherwise than by this power, authority from Hall to sell the note and debt and assign the mortgage. Théreupon Martin sold the note and debt to one Stephen Cobb, and *480executed in the name…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Nichols v. WalterSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
- Bottineau v. Ætna Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1883
3Cited by8 opinions
- State ex rel. Board of Courthouse & City Hall Com'rs v. CooleySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- State ex rel. Board of Education v. BrownSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
- Flynn v. Little Falls Electric & Water Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1898
- Kurtz v. PittsburghSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
- Alexander v. City of DuluthSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1899
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.