midpage

Van Brunt v. WakeleeVan Brunt v. Wakelee

Michigan Supreme Court
Dec 6, 1863
Reporters:
,
Before:
Martin
Martin Ch. J.:

Without going into any extended discussion of the respective rights of a mortgagor ‍​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​​​‌​​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​‍and mortgagee of chattels after foreclosure, it is very clear from all the analogies of the law, and upon general principles, that a mortgagor has a right to ‍​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​​​‌​​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​‍redeem at any time before foreclosure. In the case of a mortgage of chattels this can only be done by a reduction of the property into possession, or by ‍​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​​​‌​​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​‍a sale pursuant to the power contained in the instrument. Neither was done in this case. The assertion of Wakelee that he refused the tender, and that he should ‍​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​​​‌​​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​‍take the entire wheat, so long as he did not take it, was no foreclosure j and the offer to pay the debt as alleged in the bill ‍​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​​​‌​​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​‍was in season, and discharged the mortgage.

The decree is affirmed, with costs.

The other Justices concurred.

Case Details

Case Name: Van Brunt v. Wakelee
Court Name: Michigan Supreme Court
Date Published: Dec 6, 1863
Citations: 11 Mich. 177; 1863 Mich. LEXIS 5
Court Abbreviation: Mich.
Log In