Fleek v. Zillhaver

12 A. 420, 117 Pa. 213, 1887 Pa. LEXIS 253
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedOctober 17, 1887
DocketNo. 244
StatusPublished
Cited by29 cases

This text of 12 A. 420 (Fleek v. Zillhaver) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Fleek v. Zillhaver, 12 A. 420, 117 Pa. 213, 1887 Pa. LEXIS 253 (Pa. 1887).

Opinion

Opinion,

Mr. Justice Green:

The estate of Mary Holcomb in the premises in question was not different from the estate of her husband Charles T. Holcomb in the same premises. They were husband and wife; [218]*218the devise was to them jointly and they held the land devised by entireties, and not by moieties. The estate of each is exceptional and peculiar. It dies with the owner, and only the survivor has the absolute and unqualified fee simple title in the whole. The estate of the other, though extending to the whole during life, absolutely ceases at death. It was that kind of estate which was bound by the lien of the mortgage given by Mary Holcomb; and it was the same kind of estate which was bound by the lien of' the judgment against her husband. As against the wife, the mortgage was undoubtedly the first and indeed only lien. As against the husband, the judgment was the first lien and the mortgage the second, simply because the judgment was obtained before the mortgage was given. Had the wife survived, the mortgage would certainly have had precedence to the exclusion of the judgment, . because the estate bound by the lien of the judgment was defeasible by the death of the husband before the wife. For the same reason if the husband survived the wife, the estate of the latter was divested, and the mortgage only became operative against the husband because he had joined in its execution. But as to him it was not the first lien, he having become subject to a judgment at a time anterior to the giving of the mortgage. These views determine the case, and

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Related

Leach v. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage (In Re Leach)
458 B.R. 185 (W.D. Pennsylvania, 2011)
Best v. Galloway (In Re Best)
417 B.R. 259 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 2009)
Wansor v. First Place Bank (In Re Wansor)
346 B.R. 147 (W.D. Pennsylvania, 2006)
Hunter v. Citifinancial, Inc. (In Re Hunter)
284 B.R. 806 (E.D. Virginia, 2002)
In Re Hope
77 B.R. 470 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1987)
Lake Erie Leasing, Inc. v. Bundy (In Re Bundy)
53 B.R. 582 (W.D. Pennsylvania, 1985)
Mitchell v. Wilmington Trust Co.
449 A.2d 1055 (Court of Chancery of Delaware, 1982)
Weir v. Taylor
45 Pa. D. & C.2d 197 (Chester County Court of Common Pleas, 1967)
Wirtz v. Phillips
251 F. Supp. 789 (W.D. Pennsylvania, 1965)
A. D. Rossi, Inc. v. Drew
4 Pa. D. & C.2d 589 (Alleghany County Court of Common Pleas, 1954)
Sweeney v. Mechanics Trust Co.
55 Pa. D. & C. 80 (Dauphin County Court of Common Pleas, 1945)
C. I. T. Corporation v. Flint
5 A.2d 126 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1939)
C. I. T. Corp. v. Flint
32 Pa. D. & C. 390 (Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, 1938)
Narberth Building & Loan Ass'n v. Bryn Mawr Trust Co.
190 A. 149 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1936)
Carlisle v. Parker
188 A. 67 (Superior Court of Delaware, 1936)
Huntington v. Minard
19 Pa. D. & C. 458 (Cameron County Court of Common Pleas, 1933)
Kerin v. Palumbo
60 F.2d 480 (Third Circuit, 1932)
Klopfenstein Et Ux. v. Chadbourne
161 A. 643 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1932)
Bruzas v. Sellersville National Bank
16 Pa. D. & C. 134 (Bucks County Court of Common Pleas, 1930)
Roan v. Bingaman
12 Pa. D. & C. 673 (Centre County Court of Common Pleas, 1929)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
12 A. 420, 117 Pa. 213, 1887 Pa. LEXIS 253, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fleek-v-zillhaver-pa-1887.