Judges: Barnard, Conczzrred, Dykman, Pratt
Filed Date: 12/15/1885
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/12/2024
One of the issues' in the cause was as to whether defendant McCloskey ever accepted the conveyance to him of the premises fore
The defense of defendant O'Connor, as executor of McEvoy,. rests upon the alleged invalidity of the conveyance to his testator, from which it is argued that no consideration existed for his assuming the mortgage.
The case of Parkinson v. Sherman (74 N. Y., 88) decides that where the grantee’s possession under the deed is undisturbed, be cannot resist the claim of the mortgagee to enforce the covenant to assume the mortgage debt. In the case at bar McEvoy entered upon the premises, assumed control and executed a conveyance puz’porting to convey them. No interference with the possession is shown, nor can any be reasonably appz’ehended. The assuming of the mortgage was the consideration upon which the property was conveyed and has been enjoyed. Established legal principles forbid any relief to the estate of McEvoy. As to Archbishop McCloskey, the judgment appealed from should be revez’sed, without costs, with leave to plaintiff to discontinue as against him, without costs. Iu other respects judgment affirmed, with costs.
Part of judgment appealed from reversed as to McCloskey, without costs, and affirmed in other respects, without costs.