Burr v. Crichton
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant, William E. Haskell, from a judgment of the District Court of Hennepin County, Canty, J., entered December 21, 1891, against him and the other defendants, James E. Crichton and Sarah Crichton, for damages, $4,807.13, and costs, $15.28, and in favor of plaintiff, Charles P. Burr.
1Opinion of the CourtCollins, J.
The defendants Crichton executed and delivered their promissory note to plaintiff, securing the same by a mortgage upon real property. Subsequently they sold and conveyed this property to defendant Haskell, and he, according to the terms of the deed of conveyance, assumed and expressly promised to pay' the amount due on said note as part of the purchase price. Both mortgage and note were duly recorded, and this action was brought to recover upon the note, and upon the later promise to pay it. Defendants Crichton failed to answer. Haskell answered, but did not specifically deny the execution…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Bausman v. Credit Guarantee Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1891
- Cowing v. PetersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1886