Legal Opinion
759 Riverside Avenue, Inc. v. Marvin
Supreme Court of Florida
Decided April 18, 1933PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBuford, J.
The appellee .was complainant in the court, below in a suit to foreclose a mortgage. The defendant, 759 Riverside Avenue, Inc., a corporation, was' the mortgagor. Mamie M. Webster, the other defendant, held a third mortgage. The defendant corporation filed an amended answer, paragraph 11 of which was as follows:
“Further answering the entire amended bill as amended, this ■ 'defendant says that the complainant’s said mortgage is a1' part of one entire and indivisible contract which con-, tract -was both illegal and fraudulent, 'and that the com plainant is not entitled to be reproved by this…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Commonwealth v. Erie & North-East RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1854
- West Br. Boom Co. v. Penn. Joint L. & L. Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888
3Cited by3 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Pearson v. Probate CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1939
- SE VOLUSIA HOSP. DIST. v. State, Dept. of Ins.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1983
- Sullivan v. Securities Investment Co. of Saint LouisSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1972