Willington v. Gale

7 Mass. 138
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedOctober 15, 1810
StatusPublished
Cited by29 cases

This text of 7 Mass. 138 (Willington v. Gale) 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.

Bluebook
Willington v. Gale, 7 Mass. 138 (Mass. 1810).

Opinion

Parsons, C. J.

The mortgagor, after his mortgage, still continues the owner of the land, and seised of it against all persons but the mortgagee, or those who claim under him ; and he has therefore a right to convey the estate mortgaged, defeasible only by the mortgagee, or some person having his right; and if he conveys, thus having a right to convey, by deed executed, acknowledged, and registered, the purchaser shall be deemed actually seised, without entry or livery of seisin.

The statute of 1798, c. 77, which makes rights in equity, of redeeming real estate mortgaged, liable to be seized and sold on execution, provides that the sheriff’s deed shall convey the debtor’s right in equity to the purchaser, his heirs and assigns, in the same manner as the debtor had executed the deed.

[118]*118The purchaser thus having a legal right to the equity of redemption, has also a legal seisin of the land, when neither the mortgagee nor his assigns have entered, subject, however, to their claim; and may maintain a real action against any stranger, unless such stranger had, in fact, disseised the mortgagor before the sale of the equity, But the tenant in this case does not claim as a disseisor of the mortgagor ; against him, therefore, an actual entry, in our opinion, was not necessary; and in this opinion the judge, who tried the cause, upon further consideration concurs. The verdict must be set aside, and a new trial granted,

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

Related

Cleve v. . Adams
22 S.E.2d 567 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1942)
Stevens v. . Turlington
119 S.E. 210 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1923)
Hawes v. Nason
88 A. 538 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1913)
Van Dyke v. Grand Trunk Railway Co.
78 A. 958 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1911)
Collamore v. Collamore
32 N.E. 1034 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1893)
Cowles v. Dickinson
5 N.E. 302 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1886)
Dolliver v. St. Joseph Fire & Marine Insurance
128 Mass. 315 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1880)
McMahon v. Russell
17 Fla. 698 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1880)
White v. Rittenmyer
30 Iowa 268 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1870)
Johnson v. Harmon
19 Iowa 56 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1865)
Pace v. Chadderdon
4 Minn. 499 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1860)
Orr v. Hadley
36 N.H. 575 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1858)
Hall v. Savill
3 Greene 37 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1851)
Abbott v. Sturtevant
30 Me. 40 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1849)
Gardner's Adm'r v. Morrison
12 Ala. 547 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1847)
White v. Whitney
44 Mass. 81 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1841)
Ellison v. Daniels
11 N.H. 274 (Superior Court of New Hampshire, 1840)
Upham v. Bradley
17 Me. 423 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1840)
Mayo v. Fletcher
31 Mass. 525 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1833)
Southerin v. Mendum
5 N.H. 420 (Superior Court of New Hampshire, 1831)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
7 Mass. 138, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/willington-v-gale-mass-1810.