Legal Opinion

Bermes v. Kelley

New Jersey Court of Chancery

Decided May 8, 1931PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The inquiry here presented is whether a first or a second mortgagee is entitled to receive money which has been collected by a receiver in foreclosure as rents of the mortgaged premises.

Both mortgages contain the usual clause pledging the rents, issues and profits of the mortgaged premises. The second mortgagee filed a bill to foreclose his mortgage and procured from the court an order appointing a foreclosure receiver to collect the rents. In that suit and proceeding the first mortgagee was not a party. Subsequently the first mortgagee filed its bill to foreclose, making the second mortgagee…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Stewart v. Fairchild-Baldwin Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1919
  2. Paramount B. L. v. SacksNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1930
  3. Myers v. BrownNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1921
  4. Leeds v. GiffordNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1886
  5. New Jersey Title Guarantee & Trust Co. v. Cone & Co.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1902

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Del-New Co. v. JamesSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1933
  2. Berman v. One Forty-Five Belmont Ave. Corp.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1931
  3. Hands v. RussellNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1933
  4. Hemminger v. KlaprathPennsylvania Court of Common Pleas · 1937
  5. Spiotta v. National Grocery Co.United States District Court · 1933

6 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