Mead v. Spink
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from special term, Kings county; Cullen, Justice. The action was brought by George W. Mead against Samuel T. Ludlow and others, (holders of a judgment against the plaintiff and Samuel W. Dunscomb and another, co-defendants,) and Erwin I. Spink and others, attorneys for the. judgment creditors.
Read the full summary
Appeal from special term, Kings county; Cullen, Justice. The action was brought by George W. Mead against Samuel T. Ludlow and others, (holders of a judgment against the plaintiff and Samuel W. Dunscomb and another, co-defendants,) and Erwin I. Spink and others, attorneys for the. judgment creditors. It appeared by the complaint that plaintiff purchased certain premises for $15,000, subject to a mortgage thereon for $4,000, executed by the grantors, the defendants Dunscomb, which plaintiff assumed and agreed to pay; that when the mortgage fell due, April 1,1875, plaintiff had become…
1Opinion of the CourtBarnard, P. J.
The plaintiff, by his purchase of the mortgaged premises, became the principal debtor. The land was subject to a mortgage given by the Dunscombs, but the plaintiff agreed to pay it as part of the purchase money. Comstock v. Drohan, 71 N. Y. 9; Fairchild v. Lynch, 99 N. Y. 359, 2 N. E. Rep. 20. As a matter of course, when the plaintiff failed to perform his agreement, and the mortgage was foreclosed, the holder of the mortgage entered up a judgment for a deficiency against the mortgagor and the plaintiff. who was to pay it. There was no question of the regularity of the sale, and, if it did…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Comstock v. . DrohanNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
- Fairchild v. . LynchNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
3Cited by3 opinions
- Schultz v. MeadNew York Supreme Court · 1890
- U. S. Life Insurance v. GageNew York Supreme Court · 1890
- United States-Life Insurance v. GageNew York Supreme Court · 1890