Bryson v. James
The Superior Court of New York City
Appeal from an order appointing a receiver of the rents, issue and profits of the mortgaged premises, during the pendency of an action to foreclose the mortgage.
Read the full summary
Appeal from an order appointing a receiver of the rents, issue and profits of the mortgaged premises, during the pendency of an action to foreclose the mortgage. The motion was based upon the following covenant in the mortgage : “ And it is further expressly covenanted and agreed, by and between the parties hereto, that if default shall be made in payment of the principal sum mentioned in the condition of the said bond, or of any part thereof, or of the interest which shall accrue thereon, or of any part thereof, or of any tax or assessment, or of any part thereof, or of the interest thereon,…
1Opinion of the CourtTruax, J.
This court decided in MacKellar v. Eogers, 52 Super. Ct. 360, that the parties to a mortgage like this had made the rents of the premises a part of the security for the payment of the amount of the bond and its interest, and that therefore the mortgagee was entitled under the provisions of the mortgage to apply to the court for the appointment of a receiver. This now seems to be sustained by the intimation of the court of appeals in the case of Hollenbeck v. Donnell, 94 N. Y. 342 (see page 349), where a reference is made to the *376fact that the plaintiff in that action had omitted to take a…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Howell v. RipleyNew York Court of Chancery · 1843
- Hollenbeck v. . DonnellNew York Court of Appeals · 1884
- Bank of Ogdensburgh v. ArnoldNew York Court of Chancery · 1835
- Browning v. BettisNew York Court of Chancery · 1841
- Sea Insurance v. StebbinsNew York Court of Chancery · 1841
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.