Deeter v. Crossley
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Tama District Court. Mortgage: entering satisfaction. — Action, under section 3670 of the Revision, to recover of the defendant the penalty therein provided, for failure, after request, to satisfy a mortgage made by plaintiff to defendant.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Tama District Court. Mortgage: entering satisfaction. — Action, under section 3670 of the Revision, to recover of the defendant the penalty therein provided, for failure, after request, to satisfy a mortgage made by plaintiff to defendant. The District Court found the facts and the legal conclusions thereon as follows: 1. That, on December 11, 1858, plaintiff executed to defendant a mortgage to secure certain indebtedness, on land of plaintiff in Tama county, and said mortgage was, on December 14, 1858, duly filed for record and properly recorded in the pj%per records of said…
1Opinion of the Court
Dillon, Ch. J.
1. Mortgage: failure to enter satisfaction. — The section of the statute (Rev. § 3670) upon which this action is founded, provides, that, U whenever the amount due on any mortgage is Pa^ ^Ie mortgagee, or those legally acting for him, must acknowledge satisfaction thereof in the margin of the record of the mortgage. If he fails to do so within six months after being requested, he shall forfeit to the mortgagor the sum of twenty-five dollars.
Under the statute it is the duty of the mortgagee “ whenever the amount due on the mortgage is paid off, to acknowledge satisfaction thereof…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Abercrombie v. RedpathSupreme Court of Iowa · 1855
3Cited by10 opinions
- Abell v. BishopMontana Supreme Court · 1930
- Clearwater Bank v. KurkonskiNebraska Supreme Court · 1895
- Jones v. Fidelity Loan & Trust Co.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1895
- Thomas v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Kansas · 1883
- Capps v. United States Bond & Mortgage Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1921
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.