St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1893-10-11
SUPREME COURT LAW.
Mortgage Foreclosure and Pre-
emption Cases Decided.

emption Gases Decided.
The supreme court yesterday handed
down two decisions, affirming the court
below in both cases. Following are the
Syllabi:
Herbert Nash, respondent. VS. Elizabeth W.
Adams ct al, defendants; Charles A. Smith
and John S. Pillsbury, partners as c. a.
Smith Il Co., appellants. Herbert Nash.
appellant, VS.. Elizabeth W. Adams ct al.
defendants; Charles a. Smith and John S.
Pills bury, partners as c. a. Smith d Co.,
respondents. Judgment affirmed
COLLINS, J.
Syllabus - 1. A certain stipulation
entered into between the plaintiff in an
action to foreclose mortgage on real
property and defendants S. and 7. as
copartnerS-Who had alleged in their
answer prior and superior lien upon
the premises by virtue of the mechan-
ics' lien law and the tendency of an
action against the mOrtgagor owner to
forecloSe the same - that Judgment
might be entered as against the mort
gagor alone, and the entry of judgment
thereon held not to have had the effect
of dismissal or discontinuance of the
action as against the answering defend
ants S. and 2.
2. Subsequent to this stipulation the
S. S. & ID. company, a corporation, also
defendant and party to the Stipula-
ton, commenced an action to foreclose
claim under the mechanics lien law,
the mOrtgagor, the mortgage and s.
and p. being defendants. The mort
gagee, plaintiff herein, wholly defaulted,
and s. and P. failed to answer. Judg-
ment was duly entered determining
that the lien claim of plaintiff corpora
ton was prior and superior to that of
10 b1,e
shat held by S. and p. The
but the judgment was affirmed. He
then moved the court below to vacate
and set aside that part of its findings OF
fact and conclusions of law which au-
thoriZed that part OF the judgment
which determined the lien claims to be
coordinate. The motion was denied.
Later the mortgage redeemed from a
sale of the premises made by the cor
poratiOn to satisfy its Judgment, and on
the trial of this action relied on this re-
demption as evidence of his title. Held
that this plaintiff is concluded by that
part of the judgment which in effect
subordinated his mortgage to the lien
claim of S. andP.
8. S. and P. prosecuted their action
against the mortgagor to a final judg
ment and sold the promises in satisfac-
ton thereof. becoming the purchasers
at the sale. Held that in none of the
proceedings before mentioned has there
been set in motion the period of time
within which the present plaintiff, as
mortgage, has the right to redeem the
premises from the sale to s and P.
LAW ON PRE-EAIPTION.
Prince Investment Company, appellant, vs..
Dorothea Eheim ct al respondents. Order
affirmed. COLLINS, j.
Justice Dickinson took no part in the de-
cision.
Syllabus-1. The four additional al
ternate sections per mile of land granted
in aid of railway construction by an act
of congress approved May IL, 1864, Is
United States Statutes at Large, Oh. 81,
sec. Z, were te-be selected in the same
manner as were the lieu or indemnity
lands provided for In the original land
grant act of March 8, 1885,
2. The voluntary order of the secre-
tary of the interior made soon after the
passage of the act of 1884, whereby he
reserved and withdrew, as subject to
selection under the act, certain lands
from sale and entry, vested no rights in
the railway company benefcially. in
consistent with the right of pre-emptor