Costigan v. Costigan

40 A. 341, 20 R.I. 535, 1898 R.I. LEXIS 99

Opinion

OPINION.

Per Curiam.

The court is of opinion that no costs should he awarded to either party; for this reason:

. The relation of the parties was practically that of mortgagor and mortgagee.

While, as a general rule, a mortgagee is entitled to costs on a bill to redeem, yet in cases of improper conduct on his part, Bowen v. Atwood, 10 R. I. 302, and of his denial of a right to redeem, Sessions v. Richmond, 1 R. I. 298, costs are not awarded to him. The principal case is of the latter character. The defence was that of absolute ownership. There were two cases, because there were two deeds of separate estates, but they were substantially one estate and the decision in the second case was upon that fact.

The respondent held the title as a security for debt; and both parties denied this fact, in the face of the plain provisions of the declaration of trust.

Charles A. Wilson and Thomas A. Jenckes, for complainant. John C. Quinn, for respondent.

The decrees submitted, without costs, are ordered to be entered.