Legal Opinion

Marlatt v. Holdridge

New York Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1916Published

Action to foreclose real estate mortgage.

1Opinion of the CourtClark, J.

Defendants Holdridge gave to plaintiff a mortgage covering farm property in Avoca, to secure the payment of the sum of $3,500. After the mortgage was given, defendant Spaulding became the owner of the property, and assumed the payment of this mortgage as part of the purchase price. The mortgage contained the usual insurance clause, to the effect that the mortgagor would keep the buildings on the premises insured for the benefit of the mortgagee, and in companies approved by him, and assign and deliver the policy to the mortgagee, and in case the mortgagor failed to effect such insurance the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Bumpus v. Willett, New York County Courts1907

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

Powered by the Exa API