Francis v. Mortgage Security Corp. of America
Francis v. Mortgage Security Corp. of America
Opinion of the Court
after stating the case: There is a direct conflict in the evidence as to- whether the plaintiff was employed by the Mortgage Security Corporation of America, and the issue, as framed (conceding its sufficiency), necessarily called for a determination of this question. Hence it was error to direct a verdict thereon in plaintiff’s favor.
*736 Likewise, we think the rulings against tbe intervener were too restrictive of its rights. When property is attached, which is claimed by a stranger to the proceeding, such claimant may intervene and assert his title thereto. C. S., 829 and 840; Bulluck v. Haley, ante, 355.
There are other exceptions appearing on the record, worthy of consideration, but as a new trial must be awarded as to both appellants, we shall not consider them now. They may not arise on another hearing.
New trial.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- W. R. Francis v. Mortgage Security Corporation of America, Union Trust Company of Maryland, and the Insured Mortgage Bond Corporation of North Carolina.
- Status
- Published