Legal Opinion

Lappen v. Gill

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided September 10, 1880PublishedCited by 12 opinions

Contract for money paid. Trial in the Superior Court, without a jury, before Brigham, C. J., who allowed a bill of exceptions in substance as follows; On July 3, 1876, the plaintiff executed and delivered to the Cambridge Savings Bank a mortgage deed of certain premises in Cambridge, to secure Ms note of $1300, with interest; and, on August 22, 1876, he executed and delivered to the defendant a quitclaim deed of the same premises, containing the following clause: “ This…

Read the full summary

Contract for money paid. Trial in the Superior Court, without a jury, before Brigham, C. J., who allowed a bill of exceptions in substance as follows; On July 3, 1876, the plaintiff executed and delivered to the Cambridge Savings Bank a mortgage deed of certain premises in Cambridge, to secure Ms note of $1300, with interest; and, on August 22, 1876, he executed and delivered to the defendant a quitclaim deed of the same premises, containing the following clause: “ This conveyance is subject to a mortgage to the Cambridge Savings Bank for thirteen hundred dollars, with interest, wMch the…

1Opinion of the CourtAmes, J.

It has been repeatedly decided that, if a grantee takes a deed containing a stipulation that the land is subject to a mortgage which he assumes or agrees to pay, a duty is imposed upon him by the acceptance of the deed, and the law implies a promise to perform it, on which promise, in case of breach, assumpsit will lie. Fiske v. Tolman, 124 Mass. 254, and the cases there cited. This defendant accepted such a deed, and has failed to pay the mortgage which he thereby assumed and agreed to pay. The plaintiff thereupon paid the mortgage debt, and has brought this action to recover the amount so…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Fiske v. TolmanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1878
  2. Carlton v. JacksonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Gunst v. PelhamTexas Supreme Court · 1889
  2. Smith v. CooleyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1914
  3. McRae v. PopeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1942
  4. Closner v. ChapinCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1914
  5. Linbrook Realty Corp. v. RogersSupreme Court of Virginia · 1932

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API