Harton v. Little

Decision Date21 December 1911
Citation57 So. 851,176 Ala. 267
PartiesHARTON v. LITTLE ET AL.
CourtAlabama Supreme Court

Rehearing Denied Feb. 15, 1912.

Appeal from Chancery Court, Jefferson County; A. H. Benners Chancellor.

Suit by H. M. Harton against W. M. Little and others. From a decree for defendants, complainant appeals. Affirmed.

S. C M. Amason, for appellant.

Frank S. White & Sons and Campbell & Johnston, for appellees.

SOMERVILLE J.

The appellant, H. M. Harton, filed his bill to declare and enforce an alleged trust in certain land to which the Gibson Realty Company, one of the respondents, is shown to have a clear record title. Subsequent to the creation of the alleged trust and the alleged accrual to complainant of an undivided half interest in the land, the alleged trustee--with complainant's knowledge, and without protest from him apparently--conveyed said half interest to complainant's wife, reciting a purchase price of $5,000. Contemporaneously with this transaction, complainant and his wife executed a mortgage deed granting and selling said land to the said trustee-grantor to secure the payment of a recited purchase-money note for $3,000, as recited in the mortgage. This mortgage was afterwards foreclosed by sale under the power therein granted; the recitals of the foreclosure deed being that Mrs. Johnston, the mortgagee and payee, "for valuable consideration and before maturity indorsed transferred and assigned to the First National Bank of Birmingham the note and mortgage aforesaid," and that "W. J. Gilmore purchased for valuable consideration the note due said bank as aforesaid, and received an indorsement and transfer of the security above mentioned."

The recitals of this deed are full, and amply show, prima facie a valid foreclosure of the mortgage by the transferee and owner of the debt which it secured. Naugher v. Sparks, 110 Ala. 572, 18 So. 45. Moreover, regularity and validity are presumed in the absence of evidence to the contrary. Ward v. Ward, 108 Ala. 278, 19 So. 354.

The title thus acquired by Gilmore as purchaser at the foreclosure sale for the price of $3,951.20 passed by mesne conveyances to the Gibson Realty Company, which paid therefor to its grantor the sum of $11,666.66 in money, and received a statutory warranty deed of conveyance.

The only impeachment of this title attempted by the bill of complaint is by the allegation that Mrs. Johnston did not assign and transfer the mortgage to the bank, and that the bank did not assign and transfer the mortgage to Gilmore, but merely delivered it to him. It is not at all necessary that a mortgage deed be assigned in order to enable the owner of the debt to foreclose under a power of sale. The power of sale is a part of the security and may be exercised ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
30 cases
  • Veitch v. Woodward Iron Co.
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • May 10, 1917
    ... ... 480, 47 So. 310; Johnson v ... Wood, 125 Ala. 330, 28 So. 454; Williamson v. Mayer ... Bros., 117 Ala. 253, 23 So. 3; Harton v ... Little, 176 Ala. 267, 57 So. 851 ... What ... effect had the recitals in the deed from Mary Veitch to ... William J. Mims, ... ...
  • Sturdivant v. BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP.
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Civil Appeals
    • December 16, 2011
    ...is entitled to receive the money secured by the mortgage. Wildsmith v. Tracy et al., 80 Ala. 258 [ (1885) ]; Harton v. Little et al., 176 Ala. 267, 57 So. 851 [ (1911) ]; Johnson v. Beard, 93 Ala. 96, 9 So. 535 [ (1981) ].”Kelly v. Carmichael, 217 Ala. 534, 537, 117 So. 67, 70 (1928) (empha......
  • Ivy v. Hood
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • June 20, 1918
    ... ... Dinkins v. Latham, 79 So. 493; Johnson v ... Wood, 125 Ala. 330, 28 So. 454; Naugher v ... Sparks, 110 Ala. 572, 18 So. 45; Harton v ... Little, 176 Ala. 267, 57 So. 851 ... After ... the foreclosure of complainant's mortgage dated September ... 3, 1908, and the ... ...
  • Summerlin v. Shellpoint Mortg. Servs.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Alabama
    • February 29, 2016
    ...in order to enable the owner of the debt to foreclose under a power of sale.’ ” Perry , 100 So.3d at 1095 (quoting Harton v. Little , 176 Ala. 267, 57 So. 851, 851 (1911) ). “The power of sale is a part of the security, and may be exercised by an assignee, or any person who is entitled to t......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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