York v. Murphy

39 A. 992, 91 Me. 320, 1898 Me. LEXIS 31
CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine
DecidedJanuary 31, 1898
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 39 A. 992 (York v. Murphy) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Judicial Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
York v. Murphy, 39 A. 992, 91 Me. 320, 1898 Me. LEXIS 31 (Me. 1898).

Opinion

Haskell, J.

Bill in equity to annul a chattel mortgage and if found valid to redeem the same. The bill was dismissed on demurrer below and the cause comes up on exceptions.

The bill charges that the mortgage was not recorded in the town where the mortgagor resided, and the demurrer admits the fact. Of course, as to this plaintiff, an innocent purchaser of the property, the mortgage is invalid, and the defendants, the mortgagees, have no title to the property thereunder, and in their replevin suit against a bailee of the plaintiff, she has a perfect defense at law, and has no need of relief in equity. Act of 1895, c. 39; Bachelder v. Bean, 76 Maine, 517; Milliken v. Dockray, 80 Maine, 82.

But, if the plaintiff’s defense to the replevin suit shall fail, from facts not disclosed in her bill, inasmuch as foreclosure proceedings have been enjoined and security has been given therefor, she may hereafter be allowed to amend her bill as a bill to redeem upon payment of costs of this suit, tender of mortgage debt with interest and costs of foreclosure.

Exceptions overruled.

Bill retained for amendment.

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

Related

Scott v. Kona Development Co.
21 Haw. 408 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1913)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
39 A. 992, 91 Me. 320, 1898 Me. LEXIS 31, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/york-v-murphy-me-1898.