Hickey v. First Nat. Bank of Lyndhurst
| Decision Date | 01 February 1932 |
| Docket Number | No. 14.,14. |
| Citation | 158 A. 377 |
| Parties | HICKEY v. FIRST NAT. BANK OF LYNDHURST. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Appeal from Court of Chancery.
Suit by Bart Hickey against the First National Bank of Lyndhurst. From a decree overruling complainant's exceptions to a master's report, complainant appeals.
Affirmed.
On appeal from a decree of the Court of Chancery advised by Vice Chancellor Bigelow, who filed the following memorandum:
I have concluded that the complainant's exceptions to the master's report should be overruled. I agree with his counsel that if money paid on a mortgage be afterward repaid to the mortgagor, the lien of the mortgage cannot be extended to cover the amount of repayment to the detriment of the complainant; but it is also the rule that a creditor holding both a secured and an unsecured debt may apply payments against the unsecured debt even though such application be disadvantageous to one who holds a subsequent lien on the same security. I apply these rules as follows:
The bank, on January 28, 1927, held the note of Landells for $3,250, secured by the mortgage in question. This debt was reduced to $3,110 by August 11, when the bank made on additional loan to Landells of $650. This new loan was not secured by the mortgage as against complainant. Nor were the other new loans totaling $1,415 set forth in the master's report. But between August 11, 1927, and the date...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Applied Logic Corp., In re, 671
...the payment may be applied to an unsecured debt . . . ." 15 Williston, Contracts § 1796 (3d ed. 1972); see Hickey v. First Nat'l Bank of Lyndhurst, 110 N.J.Eq. 52, 158 A. 377 (N.J.Ct. Errors & App.1932); Borough of Totowa v. American Surety Co. of New York, 39 N.J. 332, 188 A.2d 586, 590 (1......
-
Borough of Totowa v. American Sur. Co. of New York
...to his own advantage, such as to an unsecured debt rather than a secured one or to the oldest item. Hickey v. First National Bank of Lyndhurst, 110 N.J.Eq. 52, 158 A. 377 (E. & A. 1932); Grover v. Board of Education of Twp. of Franklin, 102 N.J.Eq. 415, 417--418, 141 A. 81 (Ch.1928), affirm......
-
Naidech v. Hempfling
...items. Terhune v. Colton, 12 N.J.Eq. 232, Id., 12 N.J. Eq. 312, 320; Turner v. Hill, 56 N.J.Eq. 293, 39 A. 137; Hickey v. First National Bank, 110 N.J.Eq. 52, 158 A. 377; Grover v. Board, 102 N.J.Eq. 415, 141 A. 81; Id., 104 N.J.Eq. 197, 144 A. 918; Forst v. Kirkpatrick, 64 N.J.Eq. 578, 54 ......