General
In Re Petition of Catharine Walsh to have Mortgage marked satisfied on the Record thereof
21 Del. 945 Penne. 94·Delaware Superior Court·1904·DE
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
In Re Petition of Catharine Walsh to have Mortgage marked satisfied on the Record thereof.
.Rule to Show Cause—Satisfaction of Mortgage—Statute—Return of Sheriff—Nihil habet; Not non est inventis—Scire Facias —Practice.
The Sheriffs return to a rule to show cause why a mortgage should not be -marked satisfied on the record thereof, should be “ nihil habet,,' and not “ non est inventis.” The statute provides that the writ shall be served as now provided by law in cases of scire facias.
(September 26, 1904.)
Lore, C. J., and Pennewill and Boyce, J. J., sitting.
Walter H. Hayes for petitioner.
Superior Court, New Castle County,
September Term, 1904.
Petition of Catharine Walsh to have mortgage executed and delivered by said Catharine Walsh and Bernard Walsh unto Patrick Flaherty and recorded in Mortgage Record Z, Vol. 7, p. 504, etc., marked satisfied on the record thereof. (No. 201, September Term, 1904.)
A rule to show cause was issued in said case returnable the 26th day of September, 1904. The Sheriffs return upon said rule was non est inventis.
Mr. Hayes:—The statute provides that the writ shall be served as now provided by law in cases of scire facias. Query: Should not the sheriff’s return be “ nihil habet.”
[MAJORITY — Lore, C. J.:]
Lore, C. J.:
Let the Sheriff’s return be amended to conform to the return made in scire facias, to wit, “ nihil habet.”