Court Opinion

ID: 9826882
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 16:51:57.757735+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:42:17.890484
License: Public Domain

OPINION ON PETITION TO REHEAR.
. This cause is before us again on a petition for a re-hearing, in which it is sought: (1) to have the cost of appeal readjudicated so as not to have same paid out of the proceeds of the sale of the thirteen acres; .and (2) to have the thirteen acres sold in this court by the clerk of this court, so that the cause be not remanded to the chancery court of Cannon county; and it appearing that appellant has agreed that the foreclosure'sale may be had in this court by the clerk of this court, which agreement is as follows.:
*306“In this canse I accept notice of an application to correct the decree as to cost and waive any further notice. Said application may be made at any time.
“I hereby agree that the decree may be so modified as to authorize the sale of the property by the Court of Appeals instead of remanding the ease to the chancery court at Wood-bury, Tennessee for a sale in that court, on account of the fact that the Woodbury court is in session only two or three days the first of January and two or three days the first of July, and it will take about a year to sell the property arid confirm the sale of that court, and I think an early sale may be advantageous to all parties.
“This is not to interfere with my right to petition for a rehearing, or to take a certiorari to the Supreme Court, if I desire to do so, but only to correct the decree of the Court of Appeals as it is at present entered. July 3, 1928.”
After a re-examination of the record we are of the opinion that the first proposition is not well made, and that the petition should be denied on this proposition: (1) because it is expressly provided in the deed of trust that jthe cost of the foreclosure, including the court costs shall be paid out of the proceeds of the sale of the property; (2) the foreclosure of the deed of trust is sought and decreed under the cross-bill. The court costs incident to the foreclosure of the deed of trust or mortgage, when a suit is necessary, should be paid out of the proceeds of the sale of the property, especially where the mortgagor is insolvent. See 42 C. J., 329, sec. 2046; 7 R. C. L., 785-786; Gibson’s Suits in Chancery, Revised Edition, sec. 593; (3) because this is an equity cause. The appeal vacated the decree, and the trial is de novo in this court (See Hearst v. Proffit, 115 Tenn., 560, 91 S. W., 207); hence the bank is still a complainant and may not foreclose in this suit except by a decree of this court, and the court costs should be paid out of the proceeds of the sale; (4) because this petition to rehear asks that the foreclosure be had in this court and that the clerk of this court advertise and sell the property; hence we are of the opinion that the cost of the appeal should be paid out of the proceeds of the salq of said property as hitherto adjudged and the petition in this respect is denied.
But the parties have asked that this court vacate the order remanding the cause to the chancery court of Cannon county for a foreclosure of the deed of trust by a sale of the property, and that the deed of trust be foreclosed in this court, and that an order be entered to this effect directing the clerk of this court to advertise and sell the property as provided by law in accordance with *307the terms of the deed of trust, which is granted, and the order heretofore made in this respect is vacated. The clerk of this court is directed to advertise and sell said property as provided by the deed of trust on page 46 of the transcript of the record; but the cost of the foreclosure sale and the cost of the appeal will be paid out of the proceeds of said sale.
Faw, P. J., and DeWitt, J., concur.