Vincent v. Moore
| Decision Date | 24 October 1883 |
| Citation | 17 N.W. 81,51 Mich. 618 |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
| Parties | VINCENT v. MOORE. |
Where a mortgagee, who, to protect his mortgage, redeems the mortgaged land from tax sale, subsequently forecloses his mortgage under the power of sale, making no claim for the amount paid for taxes, and buys in the land for the amount of the mortgage debt, and the mortgagor redeems from such sale, the mortgagee cannot afterwards, by suit in equity, enforce a claim for the amount paid to redeem from the tax sale.
Appeal from St. Clair.
O'Brien J. Atkinson, for defendant.
The bill in this case appears to be filed to enforce the payment of a sum of money which complainants paid to redeem from a tax sale certain lands belonging to defendant, and upon which complainants, at the time of redemption, held a mortgage. The redemption, it is assumed, was made for the protection of the mortgage; but complainants went on afterwards and foreclosed the mortgage under the power of sale, taking no notice of what they had paid for taxes, and making no claim for the amount. The land was sold in the foreclosure proceedings, and bid in for the amount of the mortgage debt, and defendant redeemed from that sale. This suit was then instituted. We think there is no foundation for it; what complainants were compelled to pay for the protection of their mortgage did not constitute a separate and independent lien on the land; it could become a lien only in connection with and because of the mortgage, and could not exist independent of it. When, therefore, complainants took proceedings which resulted in a satisfaction of the mortgage, any lien which may have existed before for the taxes paid was necessarily discharged, whether the amount paid was claimed in those proceedings or not. All that complainants could claim by virtue of the mortgage they were bound to claim in those proceedings, and they could not at pleasure split up their demand and make the parts the subjects of separate suits.
The decree must be affirmed, with costs.
(The other justices concurred.)
To continue reading
Request your trial