Dusenbury v. Hulbert

2 Thomp. & Cook 177
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedNovember 15, 1873
StatusPublished

This text of 2 Thomp. & Cook 177 (Dusenbury v. Hulbert) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dusenbury v. Hulbert, 2 Thomp. & Cook 177 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1873).

Opinion

P. Potter, J.

I place my decision of this case upon this ground, that both parties, being bona fide mortgagees, the mortgages taking effect at the same instant of time upon the estate, and the case not coming within the provisions of the recording act, inasmuch as Seymour was not a subsequent purchaser, the equities of the parties were equal; and neither being charged with actual or constructive notice of the other’s lien, the preference is to be given to the first recorded mortgage, on account of the greater diligence by Seymour.

[179]*179But if the time of delivery of the mortgage to Seymour, instead of its date, is to be regarded as the time when it took effect as a purchase, then Seymour was a subsequent purchaser, and is entitled to priority under the recording act.

Miller, P. J., and Parker, J., concurred.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2 Thomp. & Cook 177, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dusenbury-v-hulbert-nysupct-1873.