Curyea v. Berry

Citations

• 84 Ill. 600

Syllabus

<p>1. Burnt records—restoration. Where the proof shows the regularity of a proceeding to foreclose a mortgage, a decree of sale, a sale, and its approval by the court, and the delivery of a certificate of purchase, this will be sufficient for the court to order the restoration of the record of the proceeding which had been destroyed by fire, and to require the master to execute a deed to the assignee of the certificate of purchase, and decree a surrender of possession.</p> <p>2. Recording law—turning of records does not destroy notice. The burning of the records does not destroy the notice afforded by the recording of a mortgage or deed, or the notice afforded by proceedings foreclosing the mortgage, and a subsequent purchaser, after the destruction of the records, must take notice of what the records originally showed.</p> <p>3. Presumption—of the regularity of judicial proceedings. Where the foreclosure of a mortgage, and a sale thereunder, and its approval in the circuit court, are shown, and the records are destroyed by fire, such court being one of general jurisdiction, it will be presumed the proceedings were regular and in conformity with the law, in a proceeding to restore the records.</p> <p>4. Estoppel—by acts of party inducing a purchase. Where a mortgagor informs another that he has no title to mortgaged premises; that a foreclosure was had, and the time of redemption had expired, and thereby induces such other person to purchase the certificate of purchase, the mortgagor will be estopped from afterwards questioning the regularity of the foreclosure and sale, as against such purchaser.</p>