Flanders v. Jones
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Trespass, guare clausum. In answer to the alleged trespass, the defendant relied on two mortgages from one McKenzie to him, of the premises in dispute, dated January 21 and March 2,1852, to secure the payment of notes for $200 and $100, of even date therewith.
Read the full summary
Trespass, guare clausum. In answer to the alleged trespass, the defendant relied on two mortgages from one McKenzie to him, of the premises in dispute, dated January 21 and March 2,1852, to secure the payment of notes for $200 and $100, of even date therewith. The plaintiff then introduced a writ of attachment in favor of one Emery, against said McKenzie, founded upon McKenzie’s note to Emery, dated Oct. 22, 1851, on which the premises in dispute were attached, March 6,1852, as the estate of McKenzie; the return stating that the said premises were “ subject to a mortgage to Otis Jones and…
1Opinion of the CourtWoods, C. J.
In Tweddell v. Tweddell, 2 Bro. C. Rep. 152, one who had bought of a mortgager his equity of redemption, had given him at the same time a covenant of indemnity against the mortgage debt. In discussing a question that arose upon the effect of this covenant, Lord Thurloiu remarked, “ This appears to be the common case where a man buys an equity of redemption. The question is, whether he becomes personally liable to the mortgagee. The buyer takes it subject to the charge, but the debt, as to him, is a real, not a personal debt. His contract with the mortgager is only that the debt shall not fall…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Carver v. JacksonSupreme Court of the United States · 1830
- Torrey v. Bank of OrleansNew York Court of Chancery · 1842
- Maraman v. TrunnellCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1860
- Horn v. FullerSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1834
3Cited by1 opinion
- Fletcher v. ChamberlinSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1881