Faure v. Winans
New York Court of Chancery
Bill for sale of mortgaged premises. The defendant Winans was a purchaser subsequent to the mortgage. Mr. S. Riker moved the usual decree for the sale, there being no opposition. But upon reading the master’s report, it appeared that a certain sum was included for insurance of the house mortgaged against fire.
1Opinion of the Court
The Court
inquired, on what ground the insurance' was-included, observing, that it could not be done unless a provision for it was included in the mortgage, or by express consent.
Mr. Riker said that the insurance was necessary to preserve' the security, and that it was so charged in the bill, which here had been taken as confessed.
The Court did not think this sufficient. Insurance stands on a different footing from taxes, as it may be effected by the mortgagee for his own security. But taxes are a legal charge upon the estate, not upon the mortgagee. But at a subsequent day, an order was taken…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Robinson v. . RyanNew York Court of Appeals · 1862
- Robinson v. RyanNew York Court of Appeals · 1862