Heath v. Hall
Supreme Court of Minnesota
APPEAL EBOM THE DISTRICT COURT OF MEEKER COUNTY. I. — The only feature of the foreclosure claimed to be irregular, is the omission to serve upon the Plaintiff occupying the mortgaged premises, a copy of the notice of foreclosure sale, as required by sec. 33, chap. 63, Oomp. Stats., p. 592. This omission is the sole ground upon which this action is brought to vacate and declare void the sale.
Read the full summary
APPEAL EBOM THE DISTRICT COURT OF MEEKER COUNTY. I. — The only feature of the foreclosure claimed to be irregular, is the omission to serve upon the Plaintiff occupying the mortgaged premises, a copy of the notice of foreclosure sale, as required by sec. 33, chap. 63, Oomp. Stats., p. 592. This omission is the sole ground upon which this action is brought to vacate and declare void the sale. II. — It is conceded on the part of the Appellant, that no such copy of the notice was served; but it is claimed by him that such service of such copy of notice is not essential to the validity of…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court
Emmett, C. J.
This action was brought to set aside a sale of real estate made in pursuance of a power contained in a mortgage. The Plaintiff is the grantee of the mortgagor, and as such was resident upon and in the occupancy of the mortgaged premises, at the time of the publication of the notice of sale as hereinafter mentioned. The Defendant is the assignee of the mortgage, and the purchaser at the sale.
As there was no newspaper published in the county where the premises sold were situated, the notice of the intended sale was published in a newspaper printed in an adjoining…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Dana v. FarringtonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1860
3Cited by1 opinion
- Washburn v. SharpeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1870