Colcord v. Bettinson
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Bill ru equity to redeem land in Everett from a mortgage. At the hearing, before Lord, J., it appeared that the land had been sold by the mortgagee, under a power contained in the mortgage, for breach of a condition therein, and that the only question was as to the validity of the sale. The judge ordered the bill to be dismissed, and reported the case for the considera tion of the full court. The facts appear in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtEudicott, J.
The plaintiff in 1866 executed a mortgage of the premises to the defendant, in which she described herself as of Malden, and the premises as situated in the south part of Malden. The south part of Malden was afterwards incorporated as the town of Everett. St. 1870, c. 66. In 1875, she executed the second mortgage to the defendant, under which the sale took place. In this mortgage she also describes herself as of Malden, and the premises as situated in the south part of Malden; although she then resided on the premises within the limits of Everett. This mortgage provided that, upon breach of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Drinan v. NicholsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1874
3Cited by4 opinions
- Ten Hills Co. v. Ten Hills Corp.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1939
- Chace v. MorseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1905
- People's Savings Bank v. WunderlichMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1901
- Beacon Hill Land Co. v. BowenSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1912