Anderson v. Kern

Citations

• 259 Pa. 81
• 102 A. 427
• 1917 Pa. LEXIS 520

Syllabus

<p>Mortgages — Foreclosure—Assignment—Production of bond — Defenses — Evidence—Practice, Supreme Court — Question not raised below.</p> <p>1. The production of a bond secured by a mortgage is not essential to recovery in an action on the mortgage.</p> <p>2. The question whether the assignment of a mortgage absolute on its face, was in point of fact subject to the right of redemption by the assignor upon payment by him of a debt owed the assignee will not be considered by the Supreme Court where it has not been raised in the court below.</p> <p>3. Where in an action of scire facias sur mortgage the defense was that the use-plaintiff’s title was defective, that the mortgage was not the absolute property of the party who had assigned it to the use-plaintiff, but was held as collateral for a debt, but where the assignor of the use-plaintiff testifying for defendant stated that he had received the mortgage by assignment absolute on its face as security for the payment of $3,000, one-half of which was to be paid in cash and the balance by a transfer to the witness of a promissory note, that all was to be paid at the maturity of the note, and that if not so paid the assignment of the mortgage was to be absolute, that upon maturity the note remained unpaid, so that the assignment by the terms of the agreement testified to by defendant’s witness became absolute, the evidence presented did not constitute a defense to the action^ and the trial judge made no error in directing a verdict for plaintiff.</p>