Wood v. Franklin Life Ins. Co.
| Decision Date | 03 February 1927 |
| Docket Number | No. 4867.,4867. |
| Citation | 17 F.2d 80 |
| Parties | WOOD et al. v. FRANKLIN LIFE INS. CO. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
W. M. Sleeper, of Waco, Tex. (S. D. Snodgrass, of Temple, Tex., and E. Y. Boynton and Sleeper, Boynton & Kendall, all of Waco, Tex., on the brief), for plaintiffs in error.
Eugene P. Locke, of Dallas, Tex. (Locke, Locke, Stroud & Randolph, of Dallas, Tex., on the brief), for defendant in error.
Before WALKER, BRYAN, and FOSTER, Circuit Judges.
The Franklin Life Insurance Company brought suit and recovered judgment for the possession of a tract of land. It traced its title through a deed from defendants, Ellington F. Wood and Mary Ethel Wood, his wife, and the foreclosure of a mortgage executed by their grantee, Willie B. Wood. Defendants were made parties in the foreclosure suit, on the theory that they claimed an interest inferior to the lien of the mortgage, but were dismissed out of that suit upon the filing of their answer, which contained averments to the effect that they were neither necessary nor proper parties, and were improperly joined, because they claimed title superior to the lien of the mortgage, and had been in actual possession, claiming title adversely to the mortgagor for the statutory period of limitations.
The defense set up in the present suit is that defendants were necessary parties to the foreclosure suit, and, being so, they have not yet lost their equity of redemption, and are entitled to remain in possession of the land until it is taken by suit against them. It is unnecessary to state the circumstances under which the mortgage was given, as defendants concede that it constitutes a valid lien, binding upon them.
The only proper parties to a suit to foreclose a mortgage are the mortgagor, mortgagee, and those whose interests have been acquired subsequently to the date of the mortgage. Faubion v. Rogers, 66 Tex. 472, 1 S. W. 166. If the answer of defendants in the foreclosure suit was true, their title was superior to the lien of the mortgage, and they were not proper parties. Plaintiff proceeded on the theory that the answer was true. Defendants were thereafter estopped to take an inconsistent position, that would work an injury to the plaintiff, as would be the case if it were forced to bring a new suit to settle a right that was actually involved in its original foreclosure suit.
The judgment is affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
KIRBY LUMBER CORPORATION v. Williams
...v. Greeves, 104 Tex. 620, 143 S.W. 147; Walraven v. Farmers' & Merchants' Nat. Bank, Tex.Civ.App., 53 S.W. 1028, and Wood v. Franklin Life, 5 Cir., 17 F.2d 80, that the district judge was right in holding that defendants' title under Emma Williams was not put in issue in, and was not affect......
-
Chandler Laboratories v. Smith
...Co. v. Jenkins Petroleum Process Co., 1 Cir., 99 F.2d 9, certiorari denied 305 U.S. 659, 59 S.Ct. 362, 83 L. Ed. 427; Wood v. Franklin Life Ins. Co., 5 Cir., 17 F.2d 80; Chicago S. S. & S. B. R. R. v. Fleming, 7 Cir., 109 F.2d 419; Queenan v. Mays, 10 Cir., 90 F.2d 525, certiorari denied 30......
-
KIRBY LUMBER CORPORATION v. Williams
...Farmers' and Merchants' National Bank, Tex.Civ.App., 53 S.W. 1028; Linder v. Thomas, Tex. Civ.App., 228 S.W.2d 300 and Wood v. Franklin Life Ins. Co., 5 Cir., 17 F.2d 80. 8 Tram Lumber Co. v. Hancock, 70 Tex. 312, 7 S.W. 724; Houston Oil Co. of Texas v. Niles, Tex.Com.App., 255 S.W. 604; Ha......
-
Gonzalez v. Chase Home Finance LLC, No. 3D09-2015 (Fla. App. 6/16/2010)
...foreclosed are not proper parties to the foreclosure suit." Hecht v. Wilson, 144 So. 886, 887 (Fla. 1932) (citing Wood v. Franklin Life Ins. Co., 17 F. 2d 80 (5th Cir. 1927)). Furthermore, a tenant in common, such as Freddy Gonzalez, "could convey no greater interest in the property than []......