Legal Opinion

Wolf v. Fischman

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided January 15, 1934No. Gen. No. 37,097PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice McSurely

Complainants appeal from an order requiring the receiver in a foreclosure proceeding to pay taxes after sale and the entry of a deficiency decree in favor of complainants. No one appears in this court to defend the order.

Complainants filed a bill to foreclose a junior mortgage executed by Rudolph Fischman, one of the defendants; a receiver was appointed; subsequently an order was entered extending the receivership for the benefit of the first mortgage; May 23, 1933, a decree of sale was entered and on June 20th the master’s decree of sale was confirmed and a- deficiency decree of $12,563.13…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Davis v. DaleIllinois Supreme Court · 1894
  2. Bothman v. LindstromAppellate Court of Illinois · 1921
  3. Powell v. VoightIllinois Supreme Court · 1932
  4. Verst v. Foreman-State Trust & Savings BankAppellate Court of Illinois · 1933
  5. Wright v. MattersAppellate Court of Illinois · 1920

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Clark v. HallAppellate Court of Illinois · 1939
  2. Builder's Bond & Mortgage Co. v. BickleyAppellate Court of Illinois · 1934

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

Powered by the Exa API