Perdue v. Aldridge

19 Ind. 290
Indiana Supreme Court·Decided November 15, 1862·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

A mortgage is a valid security between the mortgagor and mortgagee, without acknowledgment or record. Neither of these acts is necessarily a part of a mortgage, except as to a femme covert. 1 G. & H., p. 257, notes. She must acknowledge.

Where the suit to foreclose is by the mortgagee against the mortgagor alone, it is not necessary to aver in the complaint that the mortgagor has not conveyed away the land, or that the mortgage has been acknowledged or recorded.

Variances between instruments sued on and those offered in evidence, where the defendant will not be prejudiced thereby, may ,be amended on the trial. 2 G. & H., pp. 104, 114, and notes.

The judgment is affirmed, with five per cent, damages and costs.

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

Perdue v. Aldridge, 19 Ind. 290 (Ind. 1862).

19 Ind. 290 (Perdue v. Aldridge) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Greyhound Financial Corp. & Terre Haute v. Rlc, Inc.
637 N.E.2d 1325 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1994)
In Re Dunn
109 B.R. 865 (N.D. Indiana, 1988)
Aufderheide v. Heward
117 N.E. 212 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1917)
Allen v. Hollingshead
57 N.E. 917 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1900)
Roode v. State
5 Neb. 174 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1876)