Court Opinion

ID: 9416694
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 19:52:55.459951+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:21:31.171417
License: Public Domain

GUIEN, J.,
expressed his concurrence, adding as another, reason why the bill should have been dismissed, that .even if the mortgage given to Carswell and McClellan had been fraudulent, — which his Honor, after examining the testimony, said it was not; — the complainant, who was not a creditor, had no equity to found his bill
Decree reversed, with costs; case remanded to the court below, with directions that there the bill be dismissed with costs; the dismissal, however, to be without prejudice to any remedy of the complainant for compensation for improvements on the land made in good faith.