Northrop v. Chase

CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut
Writing for the CourtHALL, J.
Citation56 A. 518,76 Conn. 146
Decision Date18 December 1903
PartiesNORTHROP v. CHASE et al.
56 A. 518
76 Conn. 146

NORTHROP
v.
CHASE et al.

Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut.

Dec. 18, 1903.


Appeal from Court of Common Pleas, Litchfield County; Gideon H. Welch, Judge.

Action to foreclose two mortgages by Isaac A. Northrop against Frank Chase and others. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

Charles W. Murphy, for appellant.

John H. Roraback and John F. Addis, for appellees.

HALL, J. The complaint, dated November 4, 1901, alleges in the first count that on the 27th of December, 1858, Perry Chase mortgaged certain described land to Isaac Northrop to secure the payment of a note of said Perry Chase for $200, dated December 24, 1858, payable to said Isaac Northrop on demand, with interest. The second count describes another mortgage dated October 10, 1867, between the same parties, and apparently upon the same land, to secure the payment of a similar note between said parties for $166.39, dated October 10, 1867. The plaintiff is alleged to be the owner of said notes under the will of Isaac Northrop, who died in 1868. The defendants, who are the heirs of said Perry Chase, the maker of said notes, who died in 1899, allege by separate defenses to both counts of the complaint, first, adverse possession of the mortgaged premises by the mortgagor and his successors for more than 15 years after the date of the mortgages, without recognizing the existence of the mortgages; second, that the right of action upon the notes accrued more than 17 years prior to the commencement of this action and to the death of the maker of the notes; third, that the right of action to foreclose the mortgages accrued more than 20 years before the commencement of the action and the death of the mortgagor; and, fourth, that said Perry Chase, prior to his death, fully paid and discharged both of said notes and mortgages. The plaintiff in his reply denied the averments of each of said four defenses, and to said first, second, and third defenses made a further reply to the effect that within 15 years said Perry Chase had paid and promised to pay interest upon said notes, and, in consideration of the plaintiff's forbearance to foreclose said mortgages, had promised to convey his title to said premises to the plaintiff at the commencement of the year 1900. The trial court sustained the defendants' demurrer to said special reply, upon the ground, among others, that it contained no matter in avoidance.

The mere fact that an action at law upon...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 practice notes
  • Fitzgerald v. Flanagan
    • United States
    • Iowa Supreme Court
    • April 10, 1912
    ...v. Pawlot, 66 Wis. 262, 28 N. W. 183;Ball v. Wyeth, 8 Allen (Mass.) 275;Damon v. Deeves, 57 Mich. 247, 23 N. W. 798;Northrop v. Chase, 76 Conn. 146, 56 Atl. 518;Satterlund v. Beall, 12 N. D. 122, 95 N. W. 518;Alexander v. Ransom, 16 S. D. 308, 92 N. W. 418;Richmond v. Aiken, 25 Vt. 324;Book......
  • Ed. Fitzgerald v. Flanagan
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • April 10, 1912
    ...66 Wis. 262 (28 N.W. 183); Ball v. Wyeth, 90 Mass. 275, 8 Allen 275; Damon v. Deeves, 57 Mich. 247 (23 N.W. 798); Northrop v. Chase, 76 Conn. 146 (56 A. 518); Satterlund v. Beal, 12 N.D. 122 (95 N.W. 518); Alexander v. Ransom, [155 Iowa 222] 16 S.D. 302 at 308 (92 N.W. 418); Richmond v. Aik......
  • Hoffman v. Sheahin, No. 7660.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • April 7, 1941
    ...affected though the debt is barred, Robinson v. McDowell, 1903, 133 N.C. 182, 45 S.E. 545, 98 Am.St.Rep. 704; cf. Northrop v. Chase, 1903, 76 Conn. 146, 56 A. 518; Campbell v. Upton, 1898, 56 Neb. 385, 76 N.W. 910; and that the lien of the mortgage may be foreclosed although the debt is bar......
  • State v. Cullum, No. MV
    • United States
    • Circuit Court of Connecticut. Connecticut Circuit Court, Appellate Division
    • March 26, 1963
    ...is competent proof of such a fact and is the best evidence. 20 Am.Jur. 376, Evidence, § 420; see Northrop v. [2 Conn.Cir.Ct. 58] Chase, 76 Conn. 146, 148, 56 A. 518; State v. Lindsay, 109 Conn. 239, 243, 146 A. 290. However, in view of other evidence bearing on this point hereinafter consid......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
5 cases
  • Fitzgerald v. Flanagan
    • United States
    • Iowa Supreme Court
    • April 10, 1912
    ...v. Pawlot, 66 Wis. 262, 28 N. W. 183;Ball v. Wyeth, 8 Allen (Mass.) 275;Damon v. Deeves, 57 Mich. 247, 23 N. W. 798;Northrop v. Chase, 76 Conn. 146, 56 Atl. 518;Satterlund v. Beall, 12 N. D. 122, 95 N. W. 518;Alexander v. Ransom, 16 S. D. 308, 92 N. W. 418;Richmond v. Aiken, 25 Vt. 324;Book......
  • Ed. Fitzgerald v. Flanagan
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • April 10, 1912
    ...66 Wis. 262 (28 N.W. 183); Ball v. Wyeth, 90 Mass. 275, 8 Allen 275; Damon v. Deeves, 57 Mich. 247 (23 N.W. 798); Northrop v. Chase, 76 Conn. 146 (56 A. 518); Satterlund v. Beal, 12 N.D. 122 (95 N.W. 518); Alexander v. Ransom, [155 Iowa 222] 16 S.D. 302 at 308 (92 N.W. 418); Richmond v. Aik......
  • Hoffman v. Sheahin, No. 7660.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • April 7, 1941
    ...affected though the debt is barred, Robinson v. McDowell, 1903, 133 N.C. 182, 45 S.E. 545, 98 Am.St.Rep. 704; cf. Northrop v. Chase, 1903, 76 Conn. 146, 56 A. 518; Campbell v. Upton, 1898, 56 Neb. 385, 76 N.W. 910; and that the lien of the mortgage may be foreclosed although the debt is bar......
  • State v. Cullum, No. MV
    • United States
    • Circuit Court of Connecticut. Connecticut Circuit Court, Appellate Division
    • March 26, 1963
    ...is competent proof of such a fact and is the best evidence. 20 Am.Jur. 376, Evidence, § 420; see Northrop v. [2 Conn.Cir.Ct. 58] Chase, 76 Conn. 146, 148, 56 A. 518; State v. Lindsay, 109 Conn. 239, 243, 146 A. 290. However, in view of other evidence bearing on this point hereinafter consid......
  • 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