Hall v. Bliss
Decision Date | 22 October 1875 |
Citation | 118 Mass. 554 |
Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
Parties | Sarah E. M. A. Hall v. Harrison Bliss & others |
[Syllabus Material] [Syllabus Material]
Worcester Bill in Equity, filed October 28, 1874, to redeem a parcel of land in Blackstone from a mortgage.
At the hearing before Colt, J., the following facts were admitted:
The plaintiff is the wife of Edward S. Hall, of the city of New York, who, on January 24, 1870, being the owner of a manufacturing establishment in Blackstone, consisting of real and personal estate, mortgaged the same to Alexander T Stewart, of New York, to secure the payment of $ 80,000 on demand with interest, the plaintiff joining in the mortgage, in release of her right of dower. The mortgage contained the following clauses:
On October 31, 1871, the mortgage debt being unpaid, Stewart entered upon the real estate to foreclose the mortgage, and recorded a certificate of his entry. On December 1, 1871, Hall being then the owner of the mortgaged property, subject to the mortgage, was adjudged a bankrupt, upon his own petition, by the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York, and on January 19, 1872, John H. Platt was appointed his assignee and received an assignment of his estate in due form. The mortgage debt remaining unpaid, Stewart advertised the mortgaged property for sale by public auction, under the power on December 13, 1871, and, at the auction sale held on that day, bid off the whole property, in his own name, for $ 50,000, and executed, under seal, in his own name, and as the attorney of Hall, a deed, which, after reciting the making of the mortgage to him, the power of sale, the default, the publication of the notice and sale, proceeded as follows: "Now, therefore, know all men, that we the said Edward S. Hall, by Alexander T. Stewart, his attorney, duly authorized as aforesaid, and Alexander T. Stewart, by virtue and in execution of the power contained in said mortgage deed as aforesaid, and of every other power and authority me hereto enabling, do, in consideration of fifty thousand dollars to me paid by the said Alexander T. Stewart, art, of said New York, hereby give, grant, bargain, sell and convey unto the said Alexander T. Stewart, all and singular, the premises conveyed by the aforesaid mortgage deed," "to have and to hold the same to the said Alexander T. Stewart and his heirs and assigns, to their use and behoof forever. In witness whereof we, the said Edward S. Hall and Alexander T. Stewart, have hereunto set our hands and seals this twenty-third day of December, 1871.
Edward S. Hall, [Seal.]
This instrument was acknowledged the same day, and, with Stewart's affidavit of his doings, was recorded on December 27, 1871.
On March 5, 1872, Stewart conveyed all said mortgaged property, by quitclaim deed, to Platt as assignee, who, on the same day, conveyed the same to the defendants.
The property insured was partly destroyed by fire, February, 1873, and the defendants received a considerable amount of insurance money therefor.
The case was reserved, upon the foregoing facts, for the consideration and determination of the full court. If the court should be of the opinion that the plaintiff's right to redeem was barred, then the plaintiff's bill was to be dismissed; otherwise the case to be sent to a master to take the accounts necessary for the further determination of the case.
Bill dismissed.
T. L. Nelson & A. G. Bullock, for the plaintiff. As the plaintiff's bill was filed within three years after the entry to foreclose, her right to redeem the mortgage is clear, unless it is barred by the other proceedings. Davis v. Wetherell, 13 Allen 60.
The power of sale was never properly executed. Stewart was authorized, in case of a default in the performance of the condition of the mortgage, to sell the mortgaged premises at public auction, and to convey the same to the purchaser at such sale, either by his own deed, or by the deed of Hall, executed by Stewart as his attorney. No other method of executing the power was provided, and unless the power has been so executed, the mortgage has never been foreclosed and the plaintiff's right of redemption is still outstanding. The instrument relied upon as effecting a sale of the premises to Stewart is not a good execution of the power. It is not the deed or conveyance of Hall or of his grantee, or of Stewart.
It was impossible for Stewart to make a deed to himself, either in his own name or as the attorney of Hall. Dexter v. Shepard, 117 Mass. 480. Jackson v. Colden, 4 Cowen 266. Varnum v. Meserve, 8 Allen 158. Montague v. Dawes, 12 Allen 397; S. C. 14 Allen 369. 4 Cruise Dig. (Greenl. ed.) tit. 32, c. 1, § 25, note. Gen. Sts. c. 89, § 2.
The power of sale is to be strictly construed, and no title passes under it, unless all the conditions thereof are strictly complied with. Smith v. Provin, 4 Allen 516. Montague v. Dawes, 14 Allen 369. Roche v. Farnsworth, 106 Mass. 509. Powell v. Monson & Brimfield Manufacturing Co. 3 Mason 347. 2 Perry on Trusts, (2d ed.) § 602.
The transaction cannot be supported by the clause in the mortgage which authorized the mortgagee, or any person or persons in his behalf, to purchase at the sale. If it was intended by that clause to constitute such an instrument a deed or conveyance, the clause was simply void. But it may well be construed as authorizing the mortgagee to bid in the estate at the sale, and to take a conveyance through a third person. Dexter v. Shepard, 117 Mass. 480.
As an execution of the power of attorney from Hall, this execution is inoperative, because Hall had been...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Mason v. Wylde
...not precluded by the bankruptcy from exercising, after its date, in good faith, their contractual power of sale. See Hall v. Bliss, 118 Mass. 554, 560, 561,19 Am.Rep. 476;Harlow Realty Co. v. Cotter, 284 Mass. 68, 187 N.E. 118;Hiscock v. Varick Bank of New York, 206 U.S. 28, 38, 27 S.Ct. 68......
-
Steele v. Kelley
...as to authorize the performance of acts which would otherwise be invalid as violative of the trustee's normal duties. See Hall v. Bliss, 118 Mass. 554, 558-561 (1875); Dumaine v. Dumaine, 301 Mass. at 218-223, 16 N.E.2d 625; Restatement (Second) of Trusts § 170 comment t; 2A Scott, Trusts §......
-
Mason v. Wylde
... ... by the bankruptcy from exercising, after its date, in good ... faith, their contractual power of sale. See Hall v ... Bliss, 118 Mass. 554 , 560-561; Harlow Realty Co. v ... Cotter, 284 Mass. 68; Hiscock v. Varick Bank of New ... York, 206 U.S. 28, ... ...
-
Medo Photo Supply Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board
...Rousmanier's Administrators, 8 Wheat. 174, 203, 5 L.Ed. 589; Lane Mortgage Co. v. Crenshaw, 93 Cal.App. 411, 269 P. 672; Hall v. Bliss, 118 Mass. 554, 19 Am.Rep. 476; Note (1930) 39 Yale L.J. 110. 17 See, e.g., Ahern v. Baker, 34 Minn. 98, 24 N.W. 341; Mott v. Ferguson, 92 Minn. 201, 99 N.W......