Cochran v. Goodell

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Cochran v. Goodell

131 Mass. 464, 1881 Mass. LEXIS 292

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedOctober 20, 1881

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 131 Mass. 464 (Cochran v. Goodell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cochran v. Goodell, 131 Mass. 464, 1881 Mass. LEXIS 292 (Mass. 1881).

Pincite

Opinion

Gray, C. J.

The objection of misjoinder of the plaintiffs cannot prevail. A writ of entry to foreclose a mortgage under the Gen. Sts. c. 140 differs from an ordinary writ of entry, and is in the nature of a bill in equity, and governed by the same rules as to parties and relief. Webster v. Vandeventer, 6 Gray, 428. Holbrook v. Bliss, 9 Allen, 69. The two mortgages from [466]*466the defendant Goodell to the plaintiffs severally, to secure several obligations, having been given at the same time, the two mortgagees were tenants in common, and their rights were the same as if one mortgage had been made to both, to secure to each his separate debt. Burnett v. Pratt, 22 Pick. 556. Howard v. Chase, 104 Mass. 249. Either of them might have enforced his mortgage by separate suit, if necessary to secure his rights. Burnett v. Pratt, above cited. Gilson v. Gilson, 2 Allen, 115. But there is no doubt that by the rules of chancery practice both may join in one suit, and it is usually convenient that they should, in order that the rights of all parties may be determined at once. Lowe v. Morgan, 1 Bro. Ch. 368, and Belt’s note. Palmer v. Carlisle, 1 Sim. & Stu. 423. 1 Dan. Ch. Pract. (5th Am. ed.) 212. Johnson v. Brown, 11 Foster, 405. Noyes v. Barnet, 57 N. H. 605. And by our statutes, tenants in common may join even in a common law writ of entry. Gen. Sts. e. 134, § 9.

The merits of the case have hardly been argued by the defendant, and are disposed of by two well-settled rules: 1st. A second mortgagee may maintain a writ of entry to foreclose against the first mortgagee and owner of the equity of redemption. Palmer v. Fowley, 5 Gray, 545. Doten v. Hair, 16 Gray, 149. Cronin v. Hazletine, 3 Allen, 324. Kilborn v. Robbins, 8 Allen, 466. 2d. A sale on execution of part only of the lands included in one mortgage passes no title. Webster v. Foster, 15 Gray, 31. • Judgment for the plaintiffs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Gray, C. J.

The objection of misjoinder of the plaintiffs cannot prevail. A writ of entry to foreclose a mortgage under the Gen. Sts. c. 140 differs from an ordinary writ of entry, and is in the nature of a bill in equity, and governed by the same rules as to parties and relief. Webster v. Vandeventer, 6 Gray, 428. Holbrook v. Bliss, 9 Allen, 69. The two mortgages from [466]*466the defendant Goodell to the plaintiffs severally, to secure several obligations, having been given at the same time, the two mortgagees were tenants in common, and their rights were the same as if one mortgage had been made to both, to secure to each his separate debt. Burnett v. Pratt, 22 Pick. 556. Howard v. Chase, 104 Mass. 249. Either of them might have enforced his mortgage by separate suit, if necessary to secure his rights. Burnett v. Pratt, above cited. Gilson v. Gilson, 2 Allen, 115. But there is no doubt that by the rules of chancery practice both may join in one suit, and it is usually convenient that they should, in order that the rights of all parties may be determined at once. Lowe v. Morgan, 1 Bro. Ch. 368, and Belt’s note. Palmer v. Carlisle, 1 Sim. & Stu. 423. 1 Dan. Ch. Pract. (5th Am. ed.) 212. Johnson v. Brown, 11 Foster, 405. Noyes v. Barnet, 57 N. H. 605. And by our statutes, tenants in common may join even in a common law writ of entry. Gen. Sts. e. 134, § 9.

The merits of the case have hardly been argued by the defendant, and are disposed of by two well-settled rules: 1st. A second mortgagee may maintain a writ of entry to foreclose against the first mortgagee and owner of the equity of redemption. Palmer v. Fowley, 5 Gray, 545. Doten v. Hair, 16 Gray, 149. Cronin v. Hazletine, 3 Allen, 324. Kilborn v. Robbins, 8 Allen, 466. 2d. A sale on execution of part only of the lands included in one mortgage passes no title. Webster v. Foster, 15 Gray, 31. • Judgment for the plaintiffs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

131 Mass. 464, 1881 Mass. LEXIS 292, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cochran-v-goodell-mass-1881.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack