Jordan v. Humphrey
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the district court for Seott county, Macdonald, J., presiding.
1Opinion of the CourtYanderburgh, J.
The plaintiff, the assignee of the purchaser upon foreclosure sale under the mortgage in question, brings this action to restrain the defendant mortgagor from committing waste upon the mortgaged premises during the time allowed for redemption. The principal defence is that the contract of loan for which the mortgage was given was infected with usury, and that the mortgage and foreclosure proceedings are void. We think there was sufficient evidence to support the finding of the trial court that the defendant has committed waste, as charged, and was threatening to continue it.
1. Upon the charge…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Rogers v. BuckinghamSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1865
- Bissell v. KelloggNew York Supreme Court · 1871
- Eslava v. CramptonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1878
- Williams v. . FitzhughNew York Court of Appeals · 1868
- Acheson v. ChaseSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1881
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Stimson v. StimsonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1915
- Lukens v. HazlettSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
- Bannon v. BowlerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1886
- Midland Loan Finance Co. v. LorentzSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1941
- Lewis v. WilloughbySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.