Mapps v. Sharpe & Co..
Decision Date | 30 April 1863 |
Parties | THOMAS A. MAPPSv.SHARPE & COMPANY. |
Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
ERROR to Circuit Court of Will County.
Bill to redeem mortgaged premises, filed by plaintiff in error against defendants in error, a firm composed of Bernhard U. Sharpe, George N. Sharpe and George Allen. April 22, 1857, John G. Royal and wife, in consideration of $900, conveyed to Mapps by warranty deed the premises in question, the north one-half of the southeast quarter of section four of town thirty-four north, range nine east of third principal meridian. Two days thereafter Royal mortgaged the whole quarter section for the sum of $1,000 to Egbert H. White, the mortgage containing a power to sell. This mortgage was put on record before the deed to Mapps, which was recorded in May, 1857. June 10, 1857, Mapps executed to Bernhard U. Sharpe a promissory note for $824, payable in thirty days, and secured the same by mortgage, with power of sale, upon said eighty and other tracts of land. The $24 was for interest, which was agreed to be paid at three per cent. per month, and the times of payment were extended and interest to the amount of over $600 paid and indorsed as such, as stated by the court. This loan was, upon the formation in October, 1857, of the defendant firm, transferred to said firm and credited to Bernhard U. Sharpe, as a member thereof, and the eighty in question was sold under said mortgage to George N. Sharpe, through R. R. Allen, as agent, the sum for which it was sold being, as was alleged, much less than the land was worth. February 1, 1858, White, under the mortgage from Royal, sold the south half of the quarter section for $1,000, George N. Sharpe being the purchaser. The sale of the eighty in question under said mortgage had been restrained by the injunction at the suit of George N. Sharpe, but on February 1, 1850, this eighty also was sold to said Sharpe under the agreement stated by the court. The court below dismissed the complainant's bill, and the errors assigned were, (1) the dismissal of said bill; (2) in not decreeing the taking of an account, and not permitting a redemption of the premises upon payment of the balance due after deducting payments and usury; and (3) in not decreeing a reconveyance upon payment or tender of the balance so found.
McRoberts & Goodspeed, for plaintiff in error.
G. D. A. Parks, for defendants in error.
At the time the note was given, a mortgage was executed to secure its payment. The mortgage embraced several tracts of land. It also contained a power of sale if default should be made in the payment of the money. After the maturity of the note, time of payment was several times extended, from month to month, at three per cent. per month interest, and afterwards, in the same manner, at five per cent. per month.
All of the interest at these rates was paid until the 28th of October, 1858.
Prior to the execution of this mortgage, Royal, the grantor of the plaintiff in error, had given a mortgage on the whole quarter section to one White, including the eighty acres in controversy. On the first day of February, 1859, White sold this eighty acre tract to George N. Sharpe, for one hundred and fifty dollars, under his mortgage, and made the conveyance to R. R. Allen, who acted in the transaction as the agent of Sharpe. Previous to this sale the defendant, George N. Sharpe, had procured an injunction to prevent White from selling this land under his mortgage, until he should first sell the other eighty acres of the quarter section not embraced in defendants' mortgage.
On the day of the sale, and immediately before it occurred, it was agreed between White, and Allen, the agent of defendants, that he should bid off the land for one hundred and fifty dollars, and the injunction suit should be dismissed. It was still pending at the time the sale was...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Lee v. Macon County Bank
...bidding or discourage it, renders the sale void. 19 R.C.L. page 613, § 430; Longwith v. Butler, 3 Gilman (8 Ill.) 32; Mapps v. Sharpe & Company, 32 Ill. 13; Miltenberger v. Morrison et al., 39 Mo. 71; ex dem. Bowers v. Crafts, 18 Johns. (N.Y.) 110." In Dozier v. Farrior et al., supra, this ......
-
De Moville v. Merchants & Farmers Bank of Greene County
... ... great weight of the evidence. Marsh v. Elba Bank & Trust ... Co., 205 Ala. 425, 88 So. 423; Bowling v ... State, 204 Ala. 405, 85 So. 500; Scott v ... 19 R.C.L. page 613, § 430; Longwith v. Butler, 3 Gillman ... (8 Ill.) 32; Mapps v. Sharpe & Company, 32 Ill ... 13; Miltenberger v. Morrison et al., 39 Mo. 71; ... Jackson ... ...
- Harrill v. Weer
-
Merryman v. Blount
...reasons: (a) The beneficiaries, unless there was a provision in the deed to that effect, could not purchase at a sale for their benefit. 32 Ill. 13; 8 Fed. Cases, 443; 4 Minn. 32; 58 Mo. 537; N.C. 552; 9 R. I. 225; 23 Ark. 622; 52 Ill. 130; 49 Mo. 389; 76 N.C. 99; 126 N.C. 525; 80 Miss. 31.......