Sherman v. Matthieu

Citations

• 106 A.D. 368
• 94 N.Y.S. 565

Syllabus

<p>Mortgage — what services, ren'deréd aff&i'd a sufficient consideration for its satisfaction — effect of the receipt of interest after the execution of a satisfaction piece. .</p> <p>After the- death of Lti'cy B. Potter there was-.fotmd among her papers’ a bond and mortgage executed by Evá A¡ Mabeé. to the decedent, together with a signed and- witnessed, but unacknowledged! satisfaction of the mortgage. On the back of the bond in the decedent’s handwriting and bearing the same date as ' the satisfaction was the following entry: “ I hereby certify that 1 have received full' satisfaction, for the within bond, and hereby reléasé.'th'e sáid Eva A. Mubée ' from any and all obligations bécátise of the Same. .</p> <p>“ December mh, 1896.. LUCY B. POTTER.”</p> <p>No attempt was made to explain the circumstances under which the indorsement on the back of the mortgage was made, but it appeared that the said Eva A. Mabeé had rendered valuable services to-the decedent in her lifetime, for which ' the decedent had expressed ah intention to pay.</p> <p>Meld, that although the value of such services was only $300, while the amount of the mortgage was $750, such services constituted a sufficient consideration for the satisfaction of the.mortgage, and that it should be determined that the mortgage -had been fully paid and satisfied; .</p> <p>That the execution of the formal satisfaction was not inconsistent with the claim that the mortgage had actually been satisfied, as the object Of the formal satisfaction may have been simply to complete the record;</p> <p>That the fact that the bond bore an indorsement stating that interest had been paid up to April 1, 1900, a date subsequent to the date of the; satisfaction, and that a formal satisfaction had been executed but-not delivered, did not establish that there was nó intention on the part, of the mortgagee to satisfy the mortgage.</p> <p>Parker, P. J., and Smith, J., dissented.</p>