Storthz v. Bank of England
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Lonoke Chancery Court; John E. Martinecm, Chancellor; 1. A mistake in the description of property mortgaged can be corrected. 51 Ark. 394-5; 48 Mo. 367; etc. The description should have been reformed.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Lonoke Chancery Court; John E. Martinecm, Chancellor; 1. A mistake in the description of property mortgaged can be corrected. 51 Ark. 394-5; 48 Mo. 367; etc. The description should have been reformed. The appellees had notice sufficient to put them on inquiry, tinder the facts appellant had a .mortgage on the right land, the land intended. 60 Ark. 304; 77 Id. 41; 50 Id. 179; 79 Id. 592; 83 Id. 131; 87 Id. 371; 89 Id. 259; 61 Id. 123; 92 Id. 63; 98 Id. 10. 2. Reformation in a series of deeds works back to the original. 33 Ark. 120; 61 Id. 123; 54 Ark. 153. • 4. Equity will reform…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCulloch, C. J.
It appears from the pleadings in this case that one Eli Green owned forty acres of land in Lonoke County, Arkansas, described as the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of section 29, township 1 south, range 9 west. In the year 1905 Green executed to appellant Storthz a mortgage to secure a debt of $900 for borrowed money on a tract of land described in the mortgage as the southeast quarter of the northwest quar-' ter of section 29, township 1 south, range 9 west, in Lonoke County, Arkansas. .Subsequently Green mortgaged his land,'under a proper description, (southeast quarter of the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Neas v. Whitener-London Realty Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1915
3Cited by1 opinion
- McLain v. JordanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1927