Case ID: nj-misc_5/html/0677-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

EMMA GROTHENHEN v. FRANCIS D. DUFFIELD.
    Decided June 7, 1927.
    Bond and Warrant — Recovery on Bond Secured by Mortgage Which Had Been Foreclosed — Such Proceedings Under Statute Which Has Not Been Complied With Here.
    On rule, &c.
    Before Justices Pabkek and Campbell.
    Eor the rule, Avis & Avis.
    
    Contra, John C. Edmunds.
    
   Memokandum.

The judgment in this case was entered upon a bond and warrant of attorney. The bond was secured by a mortgage which had been foreclosed and the mortgaged lands sold under such proceedings before the action was taken leading up to the judgment now under attack.

Under such circumstances the proceedings are controlled by, 3 Comp. Stat., p. 3423, § 51, and it is apparent that such statute was not followed or complied with.

The rule to show cause must therefore be made absolute and the judgment set aside, with costs.