Legal Opinion

Farmers & Merchants State Bank v. Hildebrandt

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided April 28, 1936Published

1Concurrence 1

The following opinion was filed June 29, 1936:

2Concurrence · WicichemWicichem, J.

Defendant’s position appears to be that as second mortgagee he occupies the position *404of a surety because under certain circumstances he is entitled to subrogation. The question whether a second mortgagee is in any sense a surety would probably not be a profitable one to discuss, for the reason that it is largely a matter of terminology. A second mortgagee is one who has loaned money upon an already incumbered security. In the sense that if the security is inadequate, he may lose some portion of his debt by reason of the failure to liquidate the…

3Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Belloc v. DavisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
  2. Zastrow v. KnightSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1930
  3. Brown v. HardcastleCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1885
  4. Conner v. WelchWisconsin Supreme Court · 1881
  5. Battle v. Jennings Naval Stores Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1917

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API