Reed v. Marble

New York Court of Chancery

Reed v. Marble

3 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 90, 1843 N.Y. LEXIS 332

DecidedNovember 21, 1843

StatusPublished

This text of 3 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 90 (Reed v. Marble) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Chancery primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Reed v. Marble, 3 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 90, 1843 N.Y. LEXIS 332 (N.Y. 1843).

Pincite

Opinion

Decided that the assignee of a bond and mortgage, as well as assignees of other choses in action, must give notice of the assignment if he wishes to protect himself against a bona fide payment to the assignor, by the mortgagor* And that even the recording of an assignment of a mortgage is only constructive notice to subsequent purchasers or assignees of or from the mortgagor or original assignor.

Order appealed from affirmed with costs.

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

Decided that the assignee of a bond and mortgage, as well as assignees of other choses in action, must give notice of the assignment if he wishes to protect himself against a bona fide payment to the assignor, by the mortgagor* And that even the recording of an assignment of a mortgage is only constructive notice to subsequent purchasers or assignees of or from the mortgagor or original assignor.

Order appealed from affirmed with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 90, 1843 N.Y. LEXIS 332, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reed-v-marble-nychanct-1843.