Court Opinion

ID: 9866148
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-26 00:29:41.170613+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:12:57.987546
License: Public Domain

O’NIELL, C. J.,
concurs in the decree, but is of the opinion that the plaintiff is asking for less than he is entitled to, if the allegations of his petition are true; because, if his allegations are true, he became subrogated to the full extent of the mortgage of the Investors’ Mortgage Company (and not merely to the proportion which the 200 acres of land bears to the remaining 1,890 acres) in so far as the mortgage affects the 200 acres of land which the plaintiff did not buy, and as to which, therefore, the mortgage was not extinguished by confusion.