TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Helweg v. Heitcamp

Helweg, in Error v. Heitcamp, in Error

Helweg v. Heitcamp, 20 Mo. 569 (1855)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of Missouri · State Highest Courts
Decided
March 15, 1855
Judges
Ryland
Citations
20 Mo. 569
Headnotes
1. Where there are three successive deeds of trust on real estate, the surplus proceeds of a sale under the second must be applied in payment of the third, and not of the first.
Summary
Error to St. Louis Circuit Court. submitted the case upon the record.

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

Opinion of the Court — Ryland

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

Ryland, Judge,

delivered tbe opinion o£ the court.

The property in this case was incumbered by three deeds of trust regularly made and recorded in succession, in order to secure the payment of three distinct debts.

The trustee in the second deed advertised and sold the property, and there remained in his hands, after payment of the debt for which he was acting as trustee, some two or three hundred dollars surplus.

This action is brought to recover from the trustee this surplus fund, that it may be applied to the extinguishment, as far as it goes, of the debt mentioned and secured by the third deed of trust; and the only question is, how shall the surplus be applied, to the payment of the debt mentioned in the first deed of trust, or to the payment of the debt in the last or third deed of trust ? The court below decided that the money must be paid over on the debt secured by the first deed. The plaintiff excepted to that decision, and brings the case here by writ of error.

1. This court is of the opinion that the surplus money in the hands of the trustee must be paid over to the plaintiff on the debt secured by the third deed. The sale of the property, under and by virtue of the second deed of trust, did not exonerate the property from the lien theretofore on it by virtue of the first or oldest deed of trust; it was sold liable to that debt, and the parties interested can still pursue it for that debt, so far as the facts appear from the record now before us.

The surplus, therefore, must be applied, after payment of the debt and cost of sale by trustee under the second deed of trust, towards the payment of the debt mentioned and secured by the last deed of trust, the creditor in the first deed being left to his remedy.

It cannot be pretended that the sale of the property under the junior lien extinguishes a prior lien in full existence at the date of the sale. It must be taken, then, for granted that the purchaser had this prior lien in his mind, and was willing to give, *571 in addition to the amount of that lien, the amount of his present bid. The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the cause remanded for further proceedings ; the other judges concurring.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

Cited by 10 cases

View all citing references →
1873–1874: 11895–1896: 11897–1898: 11905–1906: 11907–1908: 11909–1910: 11925–1926: 11929–1930: 11987–1988: 12005–2006: 118732026peak 1873 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Seward v. New York Life Insurance152 S.E. 346 (Va. 1930)
  2. Strawbridge v. Clark52 Mo. 21 (1873)
  3. Frago v. Sage737 S.W.2d 482 (Mo. Ct. App. 1987)
  4. Jones v. Sheppard122 S.W. 764 (Mo. Ct. App. 1909)
  5. State ex rel. Enyart v. Doud269 S.W. 923 (Mo. Ct. App. 1925)
  6. Abbe v. Justus60 Mo. App. 300 (1895)

Most recent

  1. Stulz v. Citizen's Bank and Trust Co.160 S.W.3d 423 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005)
  2. Frago v. Sage737 S.W.2d 482 (Mo. Ct. App. 1987)
  3. Seward v. New York Life Insurance152 S.E. 346 (Va. 1930)
  4. State ex rel. Enyart v. Doud269 S.W. 923 (Mo. Ct. App. 1925)
  5. Jones v. Sheppard122 S.W. 764 (Mo. Ct. App. 1909)
  6. Stark v. Love106 S.W. 87 (Mo. Ct. App. 1907)

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