Koerber v. Thompson
| Decision Date | 26 April 1935 |
| Docket Number | 30422. |
| Citation | 260 N.W. 353,194 Minn. 654 |
| Parties | KOERBER et ux. v. THOMPSON. |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Appeal from District Court, Aitkin County; Alfred L. Thwing, Judge.
Proceeding by Arnold J. Koerber and wife against Lena Thompson to obtain extension of period of redemption from mortgage foreclosure sale. To review an adverse order, Lena Thompson brings certiorari.
Writ quashed, and order reversed.
T. D Sheehan, of St. Paul, for relator.
Fred F. Weddel, of Aitkin, for respondents.
Proceeding for the extension of the period of redemption under a real estate mortgage foreclosure sale, instituted pursuant to chapter 339, pt. 1, § 4, Laws 1933, Known as the Mortgage Moratorium Act. The mortgage was foreclosed on November 15 1932, by the sale of the premises. On November 18, 1933, the district court, upon application theretofore duly made by the mortgagors, extended the time of redemption to November 1 1934. On October 22, 1934, the mortgagors served upon the attorney for the mortgagee (purchaser at the sale) a notice stating that on November 10, 1934, they would ‘ apply to the District Court’ in the village of Baudette Minn., for an ‘ Order determining the reasonable rental value of said property, * * * and for an Order extending the period of redemption from said mortgage foreclosure sale, for such additional time as to said Court may seem just and proper.’ On November 8, 1934, the parties stipulated that the date of the hearing might be continued to December 5, 1934, at the village of Aitkin, and that the matter might then be heard with the same force and effect as though heard at Baudette on November 10th, as originally noted, and that no objection would be interposed by reason of the delay in hearing the matter.
No petition, notice, or other papers relative to the matter were filed with the district court prior to the date of the hearing. After hearing, the court extended the time in which redemption might be made to May 1, 1935. The case is here on certiorari.
Under the authority of Anderson v. Hill, 191 Minn. 414 254 N.W. 585, and Rebold v. Citizens' State Bank of Brainerd (Minn.) 259 N.W. 684 (opinion filed March 22 1935), there must be a reversal. Service of the notice hereinbefore referred to did not satisfy the statutory provision requiring an application to the court before expiration of the redemption period. On November 1, 1934, title to the premises...
To continue reading
Request your trial