Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
William C. Bush, Respondent, v. The Rochester City Bank et al., Appellants, 1871 — 48 N.Y. 659 · caselaw · US
Property · MBE-tested
William C. Bush, Respondent, v. The Rochester City Bank et al., Appellants
48 N.Y. 659·New York Commission of Appeals·1871·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
William C. Bush, Respondent, v. The Rochester City Bank et al., Appellants.
(Argued May 18, 1871;
decided September term, 1871.)
Action to foreclose mortgage made by James M. Demarest to Horace F. Bush, and assigned to plaintiff. At the same time the mortgage was executed, Bush executed another mortgage to the Rochester City Bank. The bank foreclosed its mortgage, bid in the property and conveyed it by quitclaim deed to defendants Campbell and Clark. The bank, and Campbell and Clark, put in answers, claiming the bank mortgage was to have priority. The court found it had no priority, but that there was an equality of lien, and ordered sale for the payment of both mortgages. The bank only appealed. Held, that the bank had no interests affected by the judgment, and had therefore no right to appeal.
James L. Angle for the appellants.
James 0. Cochrane for the respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Gbay, Hunt? and Eakl, CC., read for affirmance.
All concur. Judgment affirmed, with costs.