Moses v. Thorne
MOSES v. THORNE
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Solomon Heydenfeldt (author)
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion — Heydenfeldt
The opinion of the Court was delivered by Mr. Justice Heydenfeldt.
Mr. Chief Justice Murray concurred.
There was no right of action in the plaintiff in his own name. To entitle him to bring this suit, he should have had an assignment of the bond. The assignment of the judgment, while it may give him equitable rights to avail himself of the security afforded by the bond, cannot confer the right of bringing a common law action upon it.
The reason why a mortgage follows the transfer of a note which it secures, is because a foreclosure is only sought in equity.
The judgment is reversed.
Cited by
- Heisen v. Smith Sac. No. 950. · 1902-12-29
- Chilstrom v. Eppinger L.A. No. 585. · 1899-12-28