TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Gower v. Howe

Gower v. Howe, 20 Ind. 396 (1863)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Indiana Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
May 15, 1863
Judges
Hanna
Citations
20 Ind. 396
Headnotes
Parties — Mortgage.—The assignment of á note secured by mortgage carries the security with it, and it is not, in an action to foreclose the mortgage, necessary to make the assignor of the note a party. Change oe Yenue. — Where a change of venue is granted upon payment of costs within a specified time, and the party fails to pay the costs and perfect the change within the time, the Court may proceed to the trial of the cause, as if no change had been asked for.
Summary
APPEAL from the Noble Common Pleas.

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

Opinion of the Court — Hanna

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

Hanna, J.

Suit on a note, and to foreclose a mortgage. Demurrer to the complaint, assigning a special cause, to wit, that one Cable was not made a party — overruled.

The point 'made upon this ruling is, that as Cable was shown to be the assignor of the note, he could not transfer *397 the mortgage, at that time, so as to enable the assignee to sue in his own name; and therefore he should have been a party to answer to the assignment, &c. It is a sufficient answer to this, that the assignment of the note — the evidence of the debt — carried with it the security, the mortgage.

Robert Parrett and A. B. Kennedy, for the appellant.

The defendant applied for a change of venue to another county, which was granted upon payment of costs, &c. At the next term of the Court, the defendant had not perfected his change — had not complied with the condition by paying the costs and filing a transcript within the time specified. He had lost his right to the change, under that application, and the Court was not, as he supposes, deprived of jurisdiction, and was, so far as we can see, right in proceeding to the trial in the absence of any sufficient reason to prevent it.

It is now, for the first time, objected here, that a copy of the mortgage does not appear in the record. No such question was made in any form in the Court below, and wffiether 'it could be raised here now, we need not say, as an amended-record supplies the defect.

Per Curiam.

The judgment is affirmed, with 8 per cent, damages and costs.

How later courts describe this case

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

1870–1871: 11872–1873: 11884–1885: 11920–1921: 11930–1931: 118702026peak 1870 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Reeves v. Hayes95 Ind. 521 (1884)
  2. United States Nat. Bank v. Holton195 P. 823 (Or. 1921)
  3. Jackson v. Snell34 Ind. 241 (1870)
  4. Colignon v. Artz236 N.W. 585 (Wis. 1931)
  5. Hillman v. Stumph1 Wilson 285 (1873)

Most recent

  1. Colignon v. Artz236 N.W. 585 (Wis. 1931)
  2. United States Nat. Bank v. Holton195 P. 823 (Or. 1921)
  3. Reeves v. Hayes95 Ind. 521 (1884)
  4. Hillman v. Stumph1 Wilson 285 (1873)
  5. Jackson v. Snell34 Ind. 241 (1870)

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