The weekly Floridian. [volume] (Tallahassee, Fla.) 1867-19??, 1888-01-05
MRAD-NOTRo TO DBCIAIONs or THE
SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA.


N. G. Jordan, Appellant rs. Henry D. sayre, ct
al, Appellees-Duval county.
RANxr, j.:
o. counsel for appellant, who demurred, may be
regarded by the appellate court - abandoned
9. A suit in equity to foreclose mortgage
under seal, and apply the proceeds Of the mort
gagged property 10 the payment OF the debt Sc
cured BY the mortgage, IL an action founded on
an instrument Of writing under seal within the
meaning Of the statute Of limitation OF 1879, and
twenty years 10 the limitation prescribed by such
statute TO such suit.
8. The fact that . personal action on the
promissory note evijencing the debt, may be
barred by the lapse of the shorter period pre-
scribed bv the statute as bar to such action,
does not bar foreclosure suit Brosone ct dIs %.
Broscne, II Fla, 607, reviewed and approved.
4. When q mortgage 10 In law as we'll 40 IN
equity simply lien on the land II covers, and it
gives no right of possession of the land the mort
gagor's possession during the period allowed by
the statute FIR instituing suit of foreclosure ID
not adverse to the rights of the mortgage, but is
subordinate thereto; and the same is true as to
the possession of the mortgagors grantee, al
though such grantee hold under covenants war.
ranting the title.
8. A purchase by the owner of a mortgage at
sale under foreclosure proceeding to which
the person owning at the institution of the suit
the legal title of the land mortgaged was not a
party, does not prevent or bar subsequent fore
closure suit 10 which the person who may own
the legal title at the institution Of the latter suit
is made party.
8. A release or estoppel as to a part of the
mortgage Indebtedness and as to the lien of the
mortgage on part of the land mortgaged does
not affect the residue of the debt nor the lien OF
the mortgage as to the remainder Of the land.
z. Though an assignment OF simply the mort.
- thn int In tho md
without the mortgage debt, may be a nullity, yet
where the language of the instrument of assign.
ment il sufficient to carry both the debt and the
mortgage it will be sustained as an assignment OF
both although not In the usual form and partic-
ularly 30 where it is admitted upon the record by
both the assignor and assignee, as compliments
that both the debt and mortgage were assigned.
8. H., the owner OF mortgage duly recorded,
bid in the mortgaged land at q sale under fore
closure suit instituted by him against the mort
gagor, but to which the person owning the legal
title was not party. Afterwards 81. conveyed
by warranty deed the west fifty feet of the land
to J. for the consideration of 81 200, and then
transferred to n. 81. by deed all his right, title
and interest and oil claims and demands whatso-
ever in law and equity to the balance or east
thirty feet of the land. Aer this j. acquired the
east thirty feet by deed from the person who
owned the legal title at the institution of the
above foreclosure suit. Subsequently II. and M
II. ana L0c t8tVcTS uubO8uQ Lieu d dSoiuet
the mortgagor and ]. for foreclosure and sale oil
the east thirty feet to satisfy the mortgage in
debtedness over and above the 81 200. The bill
admits an assignment of the mortgage and the
indebtedness secured by II, TO g.: Held, That
the latter suit of foreclosure may be maintained
and that the demurrer of ]. to the bill should be
overruled.
Decree affirmed.
d. G. Jordan, A. w. Cockrell & Son, for APP
pellant; no counsel appearing for Appellees.