Legal Opinion · Dissent

Ritter v. Cost

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided March 17, 1883No. 9548Published

From the Superior Court of Marion County.

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion.

Elliott, J. —

I think Eitter was entitled to be subrogated! to the rights of the mortgagee to whom the purchase-money mortgage was executed. Peet v. Beers, 4 Ind. 46; Spray v. Rodman, 43 Ind. 225 ; McKeage v. Hanover Fire Ins. Co., 81 N. Y. 38; Sickles v. Flanagan, 79 N. Y. 224; Monticello, etc., Co. v. Loughry, 72 Ind. 562, 566; Ayers v. Adams. 82 Ind. 109.

The lien of appellee’s judgment was only on the execution debtor’s equity of redemption, and Eitter, in asserting his right to avail himself of the purchase-money mortgage, leaves the lien as it was, and as his is the…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. McKeage v. . Hanover Fire Insurance Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1880
  2. Glidewell v. SpaughIndiana Supreme Court · 1866
  3. Harrison v. AndrewsSupreme Court of Kansas · 1877
  4. Burtis v. Cook & SargentSupreme Court of Iowa · 1864
  5. Spray v. RodmanIndiana Supreme Court · 1873

20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API