TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Baker v. Marsh

Edward L. Baker, and v. Lucius D. Marsh, and

Baker v. Marsh, 44 N.W. 662 (N.D. 1890)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
North Dakota Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
February 5, 1890
Citations
44 N.W. 6621 N.D. 201890 N.D. LEXIS 3
Headnotes
1. Mortgages — Foreclosure — Sale. Where a debt is secured by mortgage on. several parcels of lands, and the court finds that the mortgagee is entitled to a sale thereof, it has no authority to except any part thereof from the decree of sale, though the value of the remainder is greater than the amount of the debt.
Summary
PPEAL from district court, Barnes county; liam H. Francis, Judge. Hon. IVIL- Action by Edward L. Baker and others, trustees of the estate of Robert H. Baker, deceased, against Lucius D. Marsh, as administrator of John Marsh, deceased, John Kurtz, Phebe Marsh, and others, to foreclose a mortgage on three parcels of land executed by John Marsh and John Kurtz to Robert H. Baker. One of these parcels of land had been conveyed to Phebe Marsh subsequent to the mortgage, and improvements had been made thereon by her. The case was referred, for the taking of testimony and ascertaining the value of the premises. The value of the two parcels was found to be greater than the mortgage debt. The court found that plaintiffs were entitled to the sale of all the premises, but decreed that the two parcels be sold, and the other be excepted from the sale; and plaintiffs appeal.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Per Curiam:.

This action was brought to foreclose a mortgage. Judgment in the court below was rendered in favor of the plaintiffs, decreeing the foreclosure of the mortgage, and the sale of only a portion of the mortgaged premises. On what theory the trial court discharged a portion of the mortgaged property from the lien of the mortgage, we fail to understand. The creditor has a right to resort to his entire security in a legal manner, and to deprive him of that right is judicial confiscation. The judgment of the district court is reversed, and that court is directed to enter judgment of foreclosure and sale, as prayed for in the complaint.

All the judges concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1986: 119862026peak 1986 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Prock v. Prock380 N.W.2d 654 (N.D. 1986)

Most recent

  1. Prock v. Prock380 N.W.2d 654 (N.D. 1986)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list