Legal Opinion

Edgell v. Stanford

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided March 15, 1831PublishedCited by 5 opinions

This was an action of ejectment, brought up from the county court on a bill of exceptions, taken-and allowed, to certain decisions made on> the triah By these exceptions, it appears, the cause went to the jury upon the general issue ; and, that the plaintiff proved the defendants in possession of the premises at the time the action was commenced, and also produced and read to the jury, without objection, a mortgage deed of the premises, given him by one of the defendants to…

Read the full summary

This was an action of ejectment, brought up from the county court on a bill of exceptions, taken-and allowed, to certain decisions made on> the triah By these exceptions, it appears, the cause went to the jury upon the general issue ; and, that the plaintiff proved the defendants in possession of the premises at the time the action was commenced, and also produced and read to the jury, without objection, a mortgage deed of the premises, given him by one of the defendants to secure the payment of a note of $440. The defendants objected, that the plaintifi could not recover, or even put them…

1Opinion of the Court

Hutchinson, C. J.,

pronounced'the opinion of tbe‘Court.— It is now well settled law, that the title of mortgaged premises is in the mortgagor, till a foreclosure. The title of the mortgagee is merely a collateral security for the payment of the debt, des* *204cribed in the mortgage deed. After the payment has fallen due; and no payment made, the mortgagee is entitled to possession of the premises ; but he takes and holds possession as collateral security for his debt; and must account for the rents and profits as payment, pro tanto, of his debt. When his debt is gone, his title is gone with it.…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Andrews v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1930
  2. Bean v. ParkerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1915
  3. Dana v. BinneySupreme Court of Vermont · 1835
  4. Boody v. DavisSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1849
  5. Blethen v. DwinalSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1853

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API