Hall v. Edwards
Michigan Supreme Court
Appeal from Ingbam. Foreclosure. Defendants Barnes and Christiancy ¡appeal. A mortgagee who releases a part of the premises to the prejudice of ■subsequent purchasers need not allow the value of the land released before selling their parcel, if he had not had notice of the purchase before the release, James v. Brown 11 Mich. .25; Reilly u. Mayer 1 Beas. 59; Blair v. Ward 2 Stockt. 126; Birnie v. Main 29 Ark. 591; Van Orden n. Johnson 1 McCart. 376.
1Per curiam
This is a foreclosure, and the only important question is whether the defendants Barnes and Christiancy, who are subsequent purchasers of a part of the mortgaged premises, have any equity against complainant as mortgagee, by reason of his having released after their' purchase a small parcel of the resi*474due of the premises. The mortgage was given to him by the defendants Edwards in October, 1873, to secure the purchase money — the premises consisting of about eighty-six acres in the city of Lansing. He is a resident of the State of New York, and he transacted a part of the business through his…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- James v. BrownMichigan Supreme Court · 1862
- Dewey v. IngersollMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
3Cited by4 opinions
- Howard v. BurnsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1898
- Balen v. LewisMichigan Supreme Court · 1902
- Dusseau v. Roscommon State BankMichigan Court of Appeals · 1978
- Sharp v. MyersFranklin Circuit Court · 1887