Essex County National Bank v. Harrison
New Jersey Court of Chancery
Heard on bill, answer and proofs. The complainant is a judgment creditor of the defendants Harriet Harrison and William Henry Harrison, and, by virtue of its judgment, has levied upon, sold and purchased at sheriff’s sale, and now holds his deed for a piece of property situate in East Orange, Essex county, in which, at a time prior to the date of the judgment, Mrs. Harrison had a life estate and William Henry Harrison held the fee, subject to his mother’s life estate, to the…
Read the full summary
Heard on bill, answer and proofs. The complainant is a judgment creditor of the defendants Harriet Harrison and William Henry Harrison, and, by virtue of its judgment, has levied upon, sold and purchased at sheriff’s sale, and now holds his deed for a piece of property situate in East Orange, Essex county, in which, at a time prior to the date of the judgment, Mrs. Harrison had a life estate and William Henry Harrison held the fee, subject to his mother’s life estate, to the equal undivided one-half part. The object of the bill is to remove a cloud upon the complainant’s title, so derived, in…
1Opinion of the Court
Pitney, V. C.
The first question argued is whether or not the defeasance in question has the effect of reducing the conveyance to the grade of a mortgage, or, in other words, whether it gives the two Harrisons the right to redeem upon the payment of the money in question. I do not think that question is open to the least doubt. The deed of conveyance was no more than a mortgage, and if the object of the bill were to redeem the premises the complainant’s case would be clear. But such is not the object of the bill, and the complainant, at the hearing, declined to accept such remedy.
The next…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Niles v. CooperSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
- Cona v. GowerNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1965
- Eckman v. BeihlSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1936
- A.M. Krantz Co. v. KortNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1931