Crosby v. Harlow
This text of 21 Me. 499 (Crosby v. Harlow) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Judicial Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The opinion of the Court was drawn up by
— In the two last cases it is clear from the disclosure of the trustee that he is not chargeable. The rents disclosed by him, as being in his hands, were, in those two cases, due and payable neither to the said Drew nor to said Wiggin, but to the plaintiff himself. He was the mortgagee of the premises; and being so, while the rents were accruing, he gave notice to Whitman, who was the agent of the morff gagor, to pay the rents, when collected, to no one but himself. This was a termination of the tenancy at will of the mortgagors, and rendered Whitman his agent and liable to him for the subsequently accruing rents. Lane v. King, 8 Wend. 584; Wadilove v. Barnett, 2 Bing. N. C. 538; Pope v. Briggs, 9 Barn. & Cres. 245. The trustee, therefore, in these two cases must be discharged ; but in the first case he is chargeable.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
21 Me. 499, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crosby-v-harlow-me-1842.