Hurck v. Erskine
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to St. Louis Circuit Cou When the deed contains a contract or provision changing the order of payment, such contract or provision will be enforced by the courts.
Read the full summary
Error to St. Louis Circuit Cou When the deed contains a contract or provision changing the order of payment, such contract or provision will be enforced by the courts. (Ellis, Adm’r of Lamme, v. Lamme, 42 Mo. 154; Bank of U. S. v. Singer, 13 Ohio, 240; Morgan v. Martin, 32 Mo. 438 ; Mason v. Barnard, 36 Mo. 384; Mitchell v. Ladew, id. 526; Thompson v. Field, 38 Mo. 320.) These provisions, in the deed under consideration, place all the notes upon an equal footing so far as the security furnished by the deed is concerned; and upon default in the payment of the first note, the trustee was…
1Opinion of the CourtWagner, Judge
In this case Hurck, the plaintiff, was the trustee in a deed of trust executed by Frank Erskine and G. W. Rucker, to secure the payment of three several promissory notes, each for $6,250, to Wm.- M. Price, due in one, two, and three years, respectively. Before maturity, Price, the payee, sold and assigned the first note to Greene Erskine, one of the defendants in this suit. The note was not paid when it became due, and no steps were dhen taken to enforce collection. After several months had elapsed, Greene Erskine desired Hurck, the trustee, to proceed and sell the property for the purpose of…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Mitchell v. LadewSupreme Court of Missouri · 1865
- Mason v. BarnardSupreme Court of Missouri · 1865
- Thompson v. FieldSupreme Court of Missouri · 1866
3Cited by15 opinions
- In re Ferguson's EstateSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- Morton v. Rock Bottom Coal Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1922
- Campbell Printing Press & Manufacturing Co. v. RoederMissouri Court of Appeals · 1891
- Kennedy v. BroderickCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1914
- Freeman v. ElliottMissouri Court of Appeals · 1891
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.