Stevens v. Hurt
This text of 17 Ind. 141 (Stevens v. Hurt) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Suit on a note, and to foreclose a mortgage; and, also, on a note which was not secured by said mortgage, but which, it is averred, was given for a part of the consideration money of the said land mortgaged. There was a judgment for the amount of both notes, and that the equity of redemption be foreclosed, and the land sold to satisfy said judgment. There was no averment of insolvency, or a want of other property, &c. See Scott v. Crawford, 12 Ind. 410.
Per Guriam. — The judgment was erroneous, as to the amount of the note not included in the mortgage; and, therefore, so much of it is reversed. In all other respects, the judgment is affirmed, at appellees’ costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
17 Ind. 141, 1861 Ind. LEXIS 327, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stevens-v-hurt-ind-1861.