Coffman v. Christenson

Decision Date06 December 1907
Citation102 Minn. 460,113 N.W. 1064
PartiesCOFFMAN v. CHRISTENSON.
CourtMinnesota Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Appeal from District Court, Norman County; Andrew Grindeland, Judge.

Action by Ashley Coffman against Carl J. Christenson. Dismissed. From an order denying a new trial, plaintiff appeals. Reversed.

Syllabus by the Court

A certificate of redemption, issued by the holder of the sheriff's certificate of mortgage foreclosure to the owner of the property on redemption from the sale, which is not filed for record within four days after the expiration of the redemption year, as required by Rev. Laws 1905, § 4483, is void as to a second redemption duly made through the sheriff, in good faith, by a junior lienholder.

This is so, even though the second redemption be made and the certificate thereof filed for record within the time limited for recording the first certificate.

The record of instruments made after the time limited by law for recording the same does not relate back to the date of execution, so as to destroy or impair intervening rights acquired in good faith. Where recorded after the time prescribed, their operation is prospective only.

Presumptions are used in the administration of the law as weapons of defense, not of assault; and, in cases where they are conflicting, effect will be given, in the absence of evidence on the subject-matter thereof, to that which negatives, rather than to that which implies, bad faith. Bryan & Coffman, for appellant.

Philip Gilbert, J. M. Hetland, and George E. Budd, for respondent.

BROWN, J.

The facts in this case are as follows: On October 19, 1901, one Frank Paska was the owner of the land in controversy and mortgaged it to Day & Wishard to secure the payment of the sum of $542.60. The mortgage was duly recorded on November 10, 1901. On January 8, 1903, Paska conveyed the land to Christenson, defendant in this action, and one Munger, by warranty deed in the usual form. The deed was recorded March 10, 1904. The Day & Wishard mortgage was duly foreclosed by advertisement on August 20, 1904, and a sheriff's certificate of sale issued to the mortgagees as purchasers. This certificate was recorded August 25, 1904. On September 7, 1904, Munger, the joint owner of the property with defendant, Christenson, by the deed from Paska, mortgaged his undivided one-half interest therein to plaintiff in this action to secure the payment of $900. The mortgage was recorded September 27, 1904, and has never been paid. The period within which defendant and Munger, the owners of the land at the time of the foreclosure of the Day & Wishard mortgage, could redeem therefrom, expired August 21, 1905. On August 19, 1905, defendant, Christenson, paid Day & Wishard the amount necessary to effect the redemption, and they in turn executed and delivered to him an instrument in the following language: ‘Thos. C. Day and George W. Wishard, the owners and holders of the following described sheriff's certificate of sale, hereby certify that they have received from C. J. Christenson the sum of five hundred thirty-eight and 85/100 dollars ($538.85) in full of the redemption from the foreclosure of the mortgage dated October 19, 1901, recorded in the office of the register of deeds of Norman county, Minnesota, December 10, 1901, at 10 o'clock a. m., in Book 10 of Mortgages, on page 337, executed by Frank Paska and Mary Paska, his wife, and covering the south half of the northeast quarter and the north half of the southeast quarter of section nineteen (19) in township one hundred and forty-five (145), of range forty-three (43), Norman county, Minnesota, as evidenced by a certain sheriff's certificate of foreclosure dated August 25, 1904, at 9 o'clock a. m., in Book No. 9 of Deeds, on pages 485 and 489; and in consideration of said payment we hereby assign and transfer unto said C. J. Christenson all our right, title, and interest in said sheriff's certificate, mortgage, and the land therein described.’ The instrument bears date August 19, 1905, but was not acknowledged until the 26th of August of that year, and was not recorded in the office of the register of deeds until August 29th. Prior to its record, on August 22, 1905, plaintiff, as mortgagee of an undivided one-half interest in the land, and, so far as the record discloses, in good faith and without notice of the redemption attempted to be made by Christenson, redeemed from the foreclosure by paying the necessary amount to the sheriff of the county, who executed and delivered to him a certificate of redemption in due form, which was recorded on August 22, 1905. The record does not disclose what became of the redemption money. It does not appear whether the sheriff still retains it, or whether he paid it over to Christenson, successor to the rights of Day & Wishard, the original holders of the sheriff's certificate. Plaintiff thereafter brought this action against Christenson to determine his adverse claims to the land, alleging that the same was vacant and unoccupied, and that defendant claimed some estate or interest therein. Defendant answered, claiming to be the owner of an undivided one half of the land and to possess a lien on the other half for $425, the grounds of which were not stated. On the facts above outlined, which were stipulated to by the parties, the court ordered the action dismissed, and plaintiff appealed from an order denying a new trial.

The whole case centers around the legal effect of the Christenson redemption. The instrument delivered to Christenson by Day & Wishard upon the payment of the redemption money purports upon its face to be both a certificate of redemption and an assignment of the sheriff's certificate of foreclosure. The parties in their stipulation of facts designated it as an assignment, and the trial court so referred to it in the findings of fact. We do not deem it necessary to determine its legal effect. It is unnecessary to a determination of the rights of the parties. If the instrument be construed as an assignment of the sheriff's certificate, and Christenson was in position to take an assignment thereof, it operated as a transfer of all the rights of Day & Wishard under the foreclosure, from which plaintiff had the undoubted right to redeem. Martin v. Sprague, 29 Minn. 53, 11 N. W. 143. If such was its effect, Christenson occupied the position of Day & Wishard, and plaintiff was obliged to redeem in order to protect his rights as junior mortgagee. If, however, the instrument be construed as a certificate of redemption, then the rights of the parties are determined by the construction to be given section 4483, Rev. Laws 1905, in connection with the failure to record the certificate within the time there prescribed. That statute provides that, where redemption is made by the mortgagor or owner of the property, the certificate thereof shall be recorded within four days after the expiration of the redemption year, and that, if not so recorded, it shall be void as to subsequent good faith redemptioners. The Christenson certificate was...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT