Holt State Bank v. Hamernes

214 N.W. 52, 171 Minn. 350, 1927 Minn. LEXIS 1594
CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota
DecidedMay 20, 1927
DocketNo. 26,110.
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 214 N.W. 52 (Holt State Bank v. Hamernes) 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.

Bluebook
Holt State Bank v. Hamernes, 214 N.W. 52, 171 Minn. 350, 1927 Minn. LEXIS 1594 (Mich. 1927).

Opinion

Dibell, J.

The plaintiff appeals from an order denying application for the appointment of a receiver of the property of the defendant Hamernes.

On November 17, 1921, the defendant gave the plaintiff bank a mortgage for $2,500, due July 1, 1922. It was foreclosed under the power of sale and the mortgaged property was purchased by the bank at the foreclosure sale on November 13, 1926, for $2,000, a sum more than $1,000 less than was due on the mortgage. There were delinquent taxes to the amount of $575 which were a paramount lien at the time of the foreclosure sale. The amount is the same now. The property produces a rental of $25 per month.

The mortgagor is the legal owner of the land after the foreclosure sale and is entitled to the rents and profits until the expiration of the year of redemption, except as they may be taken from him and applied in prevention or reduction of waste. When the plaintiff bought at the sale for $2,000 it took into consideration the $575 taxes in fixing the amount of its bid. To permit it to apply the rents on the taxes would be the equivalent of giving it the property for less than it bid; and to apply it on the principal not paid by the sale would be giving it the equivalent of possession during the redemption period. Neither can be done. Marshall & Ilsley Bank v. Cady, 76 Minn. 112, 78 N. W. 978. And see Peterson v. Herington, 169 Minn. 65, 210 N. W. 617.

Order affirmed.

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

Related

Woodmen of the World Life Insurance Society v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
200 N.W.2d 181 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1972)
Pulsifer v. Paxton
2 N.W.2d 427 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1942)
State Dept. of Rural Credit v. County of Washington
292 N.W. 204 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1940)
Wagner v. Bankers Life Co.
288 N.W. 1 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1939)
Fredin v. Cascade Realty Co.
285 N.W. 615 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1939)
House v. Anderson
266 N.W. 739 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1936)
Business Women's Holding Co. v. Farmers & Mechanics Savings Bank
259 N.W. 812 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1935)
Gardner v. W. M. Prindle & Co.
240 N.W. 351 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1932)
Grady v. First State Security Co.
229 N.W. 874 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1930)
Windom National Bank v. Reno
214 N.W. 886 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1927)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
214 N.W. 52, 171 Minn. 350, 1927 Minn. LEXIS 1594, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holt-state-bank-v-hamernes-minn-1927.