Ritchie v. Williams

Per Curiam. Without deciding whether the mortgagee being made executor of the mortgagor is an extinguishment of the dept (a) in the present case, James Williams having conveyed the property as discharged of all encumbrances, it must be considered as discharged of the mortgage before made by him to his testator. The demandant has, then, shown a good title, and is entitled to a recovery. Judgment for the demandant Footnotes [(a)] The debt is considered as having been paid to the executor, and becomes assets in his hands. Freakly vs. Fox, 9 B. & Cr. 130. — Went. Ex. 14th ed. 74. — Wankford vs. Wankford, 1 Salk. 299.— Cheltham vs. Ward, 1 B. & P. 630. — Bigelow vs. Bigelow, 4 Hammond, R. 138. — Stevens vs. Gaylord, post, 256.— Winship vs. Bass, 12 Mass. Rep. 199. — Has & Al. vs. Jackson & Al. 6 Mass. Rep. 149. — Talman vs. Wood, 1 Cox, N. J. R. 153.—3 Powell, Mortg. 1044. — The debt being paid, the mortgage was thereby discharged. — Gray vs. Jenks & Al. 3 Mason’s Rep. 520. — Vose vs. Handy, 2 Greenl. 322.—Rosevelt vs. Stackhouse, 1 Cowen, 122. — Hatch vs. White, 2 Gall. 155. — Jackson vs. Crafts, 18 Johns. 114. — Jackson vs. Randall, 18 Johns. 7. — Paxton vs. Paul, 3 Har. & M’Hen. 399. — Morgan vs. Davis, 2 Har. & M’Hen. 7. — Dean vs Spinning, 1 Hals 471.—2 Hals. 407.