Saloway v Strawbridge
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 12 November 1855 |
| Date | 12 November 1855 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 44 E.R. 232
BEFORE THE LORDS JUSTICES.
S. C. 1 K. & J. 371; 25 L. J. Ch. 121; 1 Jur. (N. S.), 1194; 4 W. R. 34.
[594] saloway v. strawbridge. Before the Lords Justices. Nov. 12, 1855. [S. C. 1 K. & J. 371; 25 L. J. Ch. 121; 1 Jur. (N. S.), 1194; 4 W. E. 34.] A power of sale and of giving valid receipts for the purchase-money was, in a mortgage in fee, given to the mortgagee, his heirs, executors, administrators or assigns. Held, that the administrator of a transferree of the mortgage, with the concurrence of a trustee to whom the heir of the mortgagee had conveyed the legal estate in trust for the administrator, could validly exercise the power, and enforce a specific performance of an agreement for a sale under it. This case came on upon appeal from a decision of Vice-Chancellor Wood, reported in the 1st Volume of Messrs. Kay and Johnson's Reports (page 371). The suit was one by a vendor for specific performance of a contract for sale, and the only question was, whether the vendor could validly exercise a power of sale contained in a mortgage. The mortgage was made by a deed dated the 9th February 1832, whereby freehold hereditaments were conveyed to the use of Archelaus Hodges, his heirs and assigns, subject to redemption, and to a proviso that, in case of default in payment of the mortgage money, it should be lawful for the said Archelaus Hodges, his heirs, executors, administrators or assigns, at any time or times thereafter, on giving six calendar months' notice in writing to the mortgagor, his heirs, executors, administrators or assigns, to sell and dispose of the mortgaged hereditaments as therein mentioned; and it was thereby declared that all contracts which should be entered into, and conveyances and assurances which should be executed, by the said Archelaus Hodges, his heirs, executors, administrators or assigns, for the purpose of effecting the sale of the said hereditaments and premises, or any part thereof, should be valid and effectual in the law to all intents and purposes whatsoever, and that the receipts in [095] writing of the said Archelaus Hodges, his heirs, executors, administrators or assigns, for the money for which the said hereditaments and premises, or any part thereof, should be sold, should be good discharges. By an indenture dated the 14th April 1835, the mortgage debt was transferred to Ebenezer Saloway, and the mortgaged hereditaments were assured unto and to the use of the said Ebenezer Saloway, his heirs and assigns for ever. Ebenezer Saloway died on the 29th December 1846. On the 27th March 1851, letters of administration of the goods and chattels of the said Ebenezer Saloway, with the will annexed, were granted to the Plaintiff; and by an indenture dated the 3d November 1853, Samuel Saloway, the heir at law of the said Ebenezer Saloway, at the request of the Plaintiff as personal representative of the said Ebenezer Saloway, conveyed unto Benjamin Saloway, his heirs and assigns, all and singular the messuages or tenements and hereditaments comprised in the said indentures of the 9th February 1832, and the 14th April 1835, with their appurtenances, to hold the same unto and to the use of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ashton v Wood
...the title upon the purchaser. Observations on Cooke v. Crawford, 13 Sim. 91; Whitfidd v. How, 2 Show. 57 ; and Soloway v. Strawbridge, 1 Kay & J. 371. Vendors who by the contract bound themselves to make out a good title to all the lands included in the contract, but were unable to shew a t......
-
Rooke v Lord Kensington
...estates sold. They cited Nisbet v. Smith (2 Bro. C. C. 582); Beaumont v. The Marqui* of Salisbury (19 Beav. 198); Salmoay v. Strawbridge (1 Kay & J. 371); Dodson v. Powell (18 L. J. (N. S.), Ch. 237); Lord Kenningkm v. Bm.we.rie (16 Beav. 194, and 19 Beav. 39). Mr. C. Boupell, for Messrs. B......
-
Jackson v Whitehead
...power to sell and to give valid receipts for the purchase-money ; Titley v. WolstenJtolme (7 Beav. 425); Saloway v. [157] Strawbrilge (1 K. & J. 371 ; 7 De G. M. & G. 594); Hall v. May (3 Kay & J. 585). The case of Uckleston v. Heap (1 De G. & Sm. 640) does not apply, and this is a trust an......
-
Hall v May
...to the cases referred to in the judgment, Macdonald v. Walker (14 Beav. 556), and the cases there collected, and Saloway v. Strawbridge (1 K. & J. 371) were also cited.] . . ' . . the vice-chancellor reserved judgment. . . August 4. vice-chancellor Sir W. page wood, after reading the trust ......