History
  • No items yet
midpage
Strong v. Stewart
4 Johns. Ch. 167
New York Court of Chancery
1819
Check Treatment
The Chancellor.

On the strength of the authorities, and on the proof of the loan, and of the fraud, on the part of the defendant, in attempting to convert a mortgage into an absolute sale, I shall decree an existing right in the *168plaintiffs to redeem. The Cases of Cotterell v. Purchase, (Cases temp. Talbot, 61.) Maxwell v. Mountacute, (Prec. in Chancery, 526.) Washburn v. Merrills, (1 Day’s Cases in Error, 139.) and the acknowledged doctrine, in 2 Atk. 99. 258. 3 Atk. 389; and 1 Powell on Mortg. 104. (4th London edit.) are sufficient to show, that parol evidence is admissible in such cases, to prove that a mortgage was intended, and not an absolute sale, and that the party had fraudulently perverted the loan into a sale. In this case, the admissions in the answer were sufficient to presume a mortgage, against the absolute terms of the assignment.

Decree accordingly.

Case Details

Case Name: Strong v. Stewart
Court Name: New York Court of Chancery
Date Published: Oct 18, 1819
Citation: 4 Johns. Ch. 167
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.