Erickson v. Hammond

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Erickson v. Hammond

116 N.W. 244, 135 Wis. 573, 1908 Wisc. LEXIS 172

DecidedMay 8, 1908

StatusPublished

This text of 116 N.W. 244 (Erickson v. Hammond) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Wisconsin Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Erickson v. Hammond, 116 N.W. 244, 135 Wis. 573, 1908 Wisc. LEXIS 172 (Wis. 1908).

Pincite

Opinion

Siebeckee, J.

As shown by the above statement, the court determinecl that the respondent acquired a mortgage lien on the premises subject to the interest acquired by Anna J. McArthur under the conveyance of June 2, 1904. This conveyance, though a deed in form, was in fact a mortgage, and secured an indebtedness owing from Clegg to the bank of which McArthur was cashier. This fact was known to the plaintiff and the other parties through whom he acquired his interest in the premises. The court’s findings of fact to this effect are supported by the evidence. It also appears that plaintiff acquired the mortgage interest represented in the conveyance to McArthur and that he obtained a conveyance of the title subject to respondent’s lien. Under these circumstances the court properly awarded judgment declaring respondent’s mortgage interest a subsisting one and dismissing the complaint.,

By the Court. — Judgment affirmed.

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

Siebeckee, J.

As shown by the above statement, the court determinecl that the respondent acquired a mortgage lien on the premises subject to the interest acquired by Anna J. McArthur under the conveyance of June 2, 1904. This conveyance, though a deed in form, was in fact a mortgage, and secured an indebtedness owing from Clegg to the bank of which McArthur was cashier. This fact was known to the plaintiff and the other parties through whom he acquired his interest in the premises. The court’s findings of fact to this effect are supported by the evidence. It also appears that plaintiff acquired the mortgage interest represented in the conveyance to McArthur and that he obtained a conveyance of the title subject to respondent’s lien. Under these circumstances the court properly awarded judgment declaring respondent’s mortgage interest a subsisting one and dismissing the complaint.,

By the Court. — Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

116 N.W. 244, 135 Wis. 573, 1908 Wisc. LEXIS 172, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/erickson-v-hammond-wis-1908.