COLLINS
v.
RIGGS
Mr. Justice BRADLEY delivered the opinion of the court.
It is clear that the criterion by which the amount tendered' was gauged was incorrect. To redeem property which has been sold under a mortgage for less than the mortgage debt, it is not sufficient to tender the amount of the sale. The whole mortgage debt must be tendered or paid into court. The party offer ing to redeem proceeds upon the hypothesis that, as to him, the mortgage has never been foreclosed and is still in existence. Therefore he can only lift it by paying it-. The money will be subject to distribution between the mortgagee and the purchaser, in equitable proportions, so as to reimburse the latter his purchase-money and pay the former the balance of his debt.
Judgment affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
SUN First Nat'l Bank OF Orlando v. R. G. C., 348 So. 2d 620 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977)…eclosure sale fixes the amount for which the mortgagor may redeem its property. We hold that a mortgagor has no such right. The Supreme Court of the United States reached a similar conclusion in the case of Collins v. Riggs, 81 U.S. (14 Wall.) 491, 20 L.Ed. 723 (1872). The court held: To redeem property which has been sold under a mortgage for less than the mortgage debt, it is not sufficient to tender the amount of the sale. The whole mortgage debt must be tendered or paid into court. The party offering…
-
Louisville Joint Stock Land Bank v. Radford, 295 U.S. 555 (U.S. 1935)…ent of the Title and Lien Theories of Mortgages, 9 New York University Law Quarterly Rev. 280. It is the general rule that a holder of the equity of redemption can redeem from the mortgagee only on paying the entire mortgage debt. Cottins v. Riggs, 14 Wall. 491; Jones v. Van Doren, 130 U. S. 684, 692; American Loan & Trust Co. v. Atlanta Electric Ry. Co., 99 Fed. 313, 315-6; Lomas & Nettleton Co. v. Di Francesco, 116 Conn. 253, 258; 164 Atl. 495; Palk v. Lord Clinton, 12 Ves. Jr. 48, 58. The rule is for th…
-
Jones v. Van Doren, 130 U.S. 684 (U.S. 1889)…ds securing a right to redeem. Iff that aspect of the case, she properly offered to redeem the whole property, by paying off the whole mortgage, because she could not, unless at the election of the mortgagee, redeem by paying less. Collins v. Riggs, 14 Wall. 491; McCabe v. Bellows, 7 Gray, 148. But the general object of the bill is to secure to the plaintiff the dower, interest of which she has been defrauded, and the bill contains a prayer for general relief. This is sufficient to enable a court of equity…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence