Kellogg v. Babcock

Saratoga Chancery Court

Kellogg v. Babcock

1 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 47, 1841 N.Y. LEXIS 357

DecidedJuly 20, 1841

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 47 (Kellogg v. Babcock) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Saratoga Chancery Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Kellogg v. Babcock, 1 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 47, 1841 N.Y. LEXIS 357 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1841).

Pincite

Opinion

In this case the chancellor decided that where the complainant has two *or more mortgages of different dates, on the same premises, the decree of foreclosure, under the Act of May, 1840, to reduce the expense of foreclosing [mortgages in the court of chancery, should , only direct the master to pay the first mortgage out of the proceeds of the sale, together with the costs of the suit; and that he bring the residue of the purchase money into court, to enable the intermediate incumbrancers, if any, who are not made parties to the suit, to claim payment out of such surplus money, in preference to the payment of the complainants’ junior mortgages. Decree for sale, with liberty to apply for execution against the defendants respectively for the deficiencies for which they are severally liable on the different bonds and mortgages, when such deficiencies become due and payable.

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

In this case the chancellor decided that where the complainant has two *or more mortgages of different dates, on the same premises, the decree of foreclosure, under the Act of May, 1840, to reduce the expense of foreclosing [mortgages in the court of chancery, should , only direct the master to pay the first mortgage out of the proceeds of the sale, together with the costs of the suit; and that he bring the residue of the purchase money into court, to enable the intermediate incumbrancers, if any, who are not made parties to the suit, to claim payment out of such surplus money, in preference to the payment of the complainants’ junior mortgages. Decree for sale, with liberty to apply for execution against the defendants respectively for the deficiencies for which they are severally liable on the different bonds and mortgages, when such deficiencies become due and payable.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 47, 1841 N.Y. LEXIS 357, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kellogg-v-babcock-nychanctsara-1841.