Eshbach v. Zimmerman
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
March 24. — The assignees of A. conveyed to Brower, in fee, April 1, 1843. Zimmerman purchased at sheriff’s sale, under a judgment, in January, 1844, against Brower, and on this title-brought ejectment.
Read the full summary
March 24. — The assignees of A. conveyed to Brower, in fee, April 1, 1843. Zimmerman purchased at sheriff’s sale, under a judgment, in January, 1844, against Brower, and on this title-brought ejectment. The defendant showed a deed, in fee, from Brower, dated April 1, 1843. To avoid this, plaintiff showed evidence, which the jury found to be the fact, that this conveyance was merely to enable him to raise money, which was done on a mortgage by Eshbach, the defendant, to Stetler. Brower and Eshbach were in possession as partners for about a month, from Sept. 1843, when Brower left, and Eshbach…
1Opinion of the CourtRogers, J.
— If the evidence is believed, and the jury have found it to be true, this is a case between cestui que trust and trustee, and not between mortgagor and mortgagee. But whether it be the one or the other, (I mean after the day the money is payable, the mortgagee being in possession,) the ejectment is in the nature of a bill in chancery, and of course governed by principles of equity. It is not, therefore, a case which requires a tender before the commencement of the suit, as is ruled in Derling v. Williamson, 9 Watts, 318, and in other cases, for a court of chancery always considers the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Devling v. WilliamsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1840
3Cited by1 opinion
- Strealy v. SpoonhourSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928