Grace v. Lichtscheidl
This text of 249 N.W. 672 (Grace v. Lichtscheidl) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinions
The above case was argued and submitted with that of Blaisdell v. Home B. & L. Assn. 189 Minn. 422, 249 N. W. 334, in which a decision has this day been filed.
In our opinion the fact that in the instant case the property involved is not the homestead of the mortgagors, the plaintiffs, does not affect the result. If the law is valid so as to permit extension of the period of redemption from mortgage foreclosure sales of homesteads, it should also be held valid so as to permit extension of the period of redemption from mortgage foreclosure sales of property which is not the homestead of the mortgagor. There is no sufficient reason for holding part I of L. 1933, p. 514, c. 339, invalid when part II thereof is held constitutional.
The order is reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
249 N.W. 672, 189 Minn. 450, 1933 Minn. LEXIS 808, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grace-v-lichtscheidl-minn-1933.