Priority Mtg. & Inv. Co. v. Flesariu

Ohio Court of Appeals

Priority Mtg. & Inv. Co. v. Flesariu

2 Ohio Law. Abs. 760, 1924 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1460

CourtOhio Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 23, 1924

DocketNo. 866½

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 2 Ohio Law. Abs. 760 (Priority Mtg. & Inv. Co. v. Flesariu) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Priority Mtg. & Inv. Co. v. Flesariu, 2 Ohio Law. Abs. 760, 1924 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1460 (Ohio Ct. App. 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

WASHBURN, J.

Epitomized Opinion

Published Only in Ohio Law Abstract

This was an action to determine the priority of two mortgages. Flesariu gave a mortgage [761]*761to the Priority Company. This mortgage was defectively executed in that it had but one attesting witness, which mortgage was recorded. Later, Flesariu deeded the real estate to Murphy, not mentioning in the deed the Priority Company’s mortgage, and took back a purchase money mortgage which he later sold and assigned to Cochran, who in turn assigned it to Marsh. Both Cochran and Marsh, at the time of said assignments of said mortgage, knew of the other mortgage and that the Priority Company claimed a lien upon said real estate. In finding a prior lien for the Priority Company the Court 'of Appeals held:

Attorneys — Slabough, Young, Seiberling, Huber & Guinther, for Priority Mtg. & Inv. Co.; Doolittle, Foust & Holden, for D. E. Marsh; all of Akron.

1. Under 8542 GC. an instrument not being executed according to the requirements of the statute cannot be properly recorded, and therefore as to third parties is not effective.

2. A mortgage improperly executed, while effective as between the mortgagor and the mortgagee is not effective as to third persons who acquire an interest in or lien upon said real estate, even though such third parties have full knowledge of such mortgage and knew that the parties would regard the transaction as creating an equitable mortgage.

8. 8542 GC. should not be construed as to permit Flesariu, the mortgagor, to afterwards acquire a legal title to or a lien in law upon the property superior to the equitable lien theroen which he had himslef created. Under the statute a mortgage is not a lien as to third parties until it is properly executed and recorded, but Flesariu, the maker of the mortgage, was not a third party and his assigns with full knowledge was not a third party, and therefore,. Flesariu, not having a prior lien, could not give a prior lien to his assigns.

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

WASHBURN, J.

Epitomized Opinion

Published Only in Ohio Law Abstract

This was an action to determine the priority of two mortgages. Flesariu gave a mortgage [761]*761to the Priority Company. This mortgage was defectively executed in that it had but one attesting witness, which mortgage was recorded. Later, Flesariu deeded the real estate to Murphy, not mentioning in the deed the Priority Company’s mortgage, and took back a purchase money mortgage which he later sold and assigned to Cochran, who in turn assigned it to Marsh. Both Cochran and Marsh, at the time of said assignments of said mortgage, knew of the other mortgage and that the Priority Company claimed a lien upon said real estate. In finding a prior lien for the Priority Company the Court 'of Appeals held:

Attorneys — Slabough, Young, Seiberling, Huber & Guinther, for Priority Mtg. & Inv. Co.; Doolittle, Foust & Holden, for D. E. Marsh; all of Akron.

1. Under 8542 GC. an instrument not being executed according to the requirements of the statute cannot be properly recorded, and therefore as to third parties is not effective.

2. A mortgage improperly executed, while effective as between the mortgagor and the mortgagee is not effective as to third persons who acquire an interest in or lien upon said real estate, even though such third parties have full knowledge of such mortgage and knew that the parties would regard the transaction as creating an equitable mortgage.

8. 8542 GC. should not be construed as to permit Flesariu, the mortgagor, to afterwards acquire a legal title to or a lien in law upon the property superior to the equitable lien theroen which he had himslef created. Under the statute a mortgage is not a lien as to third parties until it is properly executed and recorded, but Flesariu, the maker of the mortgage, was not a third party and his assigns with full knowledge was not a third party, and therefore,. Flesariu, not having a prior lien, could not give a prior lien to his assigns.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Ohio Law. Abs. 760, 1924 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1460, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/priority-mtg-inv-co-v-flesariu-ohioctapp-1924.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack