Mann v. Earle
This text of 70 Mass. 299 (Mann v. Earle) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The single question is, whether the actual entry
of a mortgagee and possession under such entry can avail as against the mortgagor, as to right of possession, when the mortgagee had instituted his action to foreclose his mortgage, and the conditional judgment had been rendered in that action, but the period of two months had not elapsed. As to this, we have no doubt. The mortgagee has the right at all times, after breach of condition, to enter peaceably and take possession, and this right is not lost by his pursuing the statute remedy to foreclose his mortgage. Such actual entry is lawful, and may operate to give him possession, although it may not affect the foreclosure. An actual possession by the mortgagee is not inconsistent with maintaining an action to foreclose a mortgage. Merriam v. Merriam, 6 Cush. 93. Page v. Robinson, 10 Cush. 101. The possession was therefore in the plaintiffs, and the action may wed be maintained by them.
Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
70 Mass. 299, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mann-v-earle-mass-1855.