The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1902-08-23
INJUNCTION
SOUGh BY
LORING
Wants Randall and Goff Re-
strained From Transferring a
Mortgage Petition Denied.

There was hearing before Judge wii-
bur today in the equity suit Of Benjamin
C. Loring against William r. Randall OF
this city and David II Goff OF East Provi-
dence on complainant's petition for
temporary Injunction 10 restrain Messrs.
Randall and Goff from transferring a cer-
tain mortgage.
In his bill OF complaint ne says that on
Sept. 18th. 1900. one Charles X. Dunning
and Pinkey a. Danning. his wife. made
mortgage TO him for $1,000 The real es-
tate mortgaged was subject to a prior
mortgage FOR 5000 TO one Andrew n. Med
bury.
Goff was the agent Of Medbury it is
claimed. ard complainant owed Gof5
about 800.
on Sept. Is. 1900. Mr.. Lorlng agreed to
pledge 10 Con the Dunning mortgage
$500 OF which was TO be used 90 pay the
prior mortgage OF Medbury and the re-
naming $500 was to be kept by Mr. Con
to pay of the Indebtedness of Loring.
The assignment was made In blank
form and later the blank was filled up
with the names of Randall and Con.
Loring claims he let Randall collect
monthly from the Cummings on the mort
gage which by agreement were TO be first
applied to the payment OF interest and
then 10 the reduction of the principal
Mr.. Loring asserts that the defendants
now claim that the mortgage was not
given 10 Mr.. Con az collateral security.
but that II was an absolute transfer TO
Randall. who held the same subject to no
equity. The mortgage was At one time In
POSSESSION of one Hovey. Mr.. Loring asks
that Randall may be decreed 10 transfer
this mortgage to him. Loring. on the pay
ment of $1,000 and interest thereon less
the sums paid by the Cummings and such
sums as may have been paid for rent or
the premises by a party who has occu-
pied the premises since the Dunnings left
II.
William. c. Loring on cross-examination
admitted he had got money from both
Randall and Goff but II had been paid
| back Loring said that ne borrowed $500
| from Gofr and that n mortgage was given
| for $500. He explained this by saying
| that he owed some small bills and Mr..
| Con- suggested II the mortgage was made
| for the sum he named there would be no
trouble about attachments. Mr.. Goff said
he was good for the balance any time.
Mr. Randall testified that Mr. Lorins
had been paid all the money due him un-
der the agreement made when the mort
gage was transferred.
Mr. Con- said he had had business trans
action with Mr.. Loring and In 1901 BAL
ance was struck which showed Mr.. Lor-
Ing owed him. Mr.. Goff $1,000 Witness
said ne was willing TO turn over any ball
ance on the mortgage as soon as Mr..
Loring cancelled his indebtedness to
him.
On cross-examination Mr.. Con said the
understanding In regard to the Dunning
mortgage was the Medbury mortgage of
5000 was TO be paid of and he, Con. was
to have the balance. Mr.. Gofr claimed to
have loaned Mr.. Loring n large amount
OF money.
Both Mr.. Randall and Mr.. Con testified
they were taxed for large sums of mon
ey and would be able TO pay any Judg-
ment against them.
After brief arguments by counsel Judge
Wilbur denied the motion for temporary
Injunction. James A. Pirce represented
the defendants.