New York Court of Chancery, 1844

McKinstry v. Curtis

McKinstry v. Curtis
New York Court of Chancery · Decided January 2, 1844
10 Paige Ch. 503

Counsel

K. Miller, for the complainants., M. T. Reynolds, for the defendant.

McKinstry v. Curtis

Opinion of the Court

The Chancellor

decided, that where the equity of redemption in mortgaged premises is sold under a judgment, or under a junior mortgage, which judgment or mortgage is a lien upon the equity of redemption merely, the legal presumption is that the purchaser only bids to the value of such equity of redemption; and that the land thus purchased is in equity the primary fund to pay the amount due upon the *504prior bond and mortgage. He said it would therefore be inequitable for the holder of the prior bond and mortgage, in this case, to assign the same to the complainants, to enable them to collect the amount thereof out of the property of the mortgagor, by a suit upon the bond, under the circumstances stated in their bill.

Injunction dissolved.(a)

See Tice v. Annin, (2 John. Ch. Rep. 125;) and Heyer v. Pruyn, (7 Paige's Rep. 465.)

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.