•  
  •  

Home > Journals > Michigan Law Review > MLR > Volume 40 > Issue 2 (1941)

 

Abstract

An interest in certain land was mortgaged by the owners to the plaintiff in October, 1933. This same interest was subjected to a lien of certain judgment creditors recovered against the owners in July, 1936. The defendant, as assignee of the claim of the judgment creditors, claimed priority over the mortgagee by reason of the fact that the mortgage was delivered to the register for the purpose of being recorded as a deed and was in fact so recorded. The judgment creditors disclaimed all notice of this prior mortgage. The statutes of New Jersey provide that mortgages should be registered in the book provided for that purpose; another section states that every mortgage for lands "shall be void and of no effect against a subsequent judgment creditor . . . unless such mortgage shall . . . be recorded . . . as hereinbefore provided . . . ." In an action by the plaintiff for a partition of real estate and to collect the proceeds of the foreclosure, held, a subsequent judgment creditor is not charged with constructive notice of a mortgage recorded in the deeds register and such mortgage is completely void as to him. Hadfield v. Hadfield, 128 N. J. Eq. 510, 17 A. (2d) 169 (1941).

Download

Share

COinS