This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1864 Excerpt: ...of the mortgage debt, the burden of proof was on him." Brooks ». Briggs, 32 Maine, 447, 448. by the parol evidence. It was a broad question of fraud, or of payment and discharge; and such evidence, we think, was clearly applicable, especially between the parties who are now contending." l 6. In case of a mortgage for indemnity, the mortgagee's title to the property does not depend upon his having actually paid the debt, or being solely liable therefor. Thus, in case of a mortgage of indemnity frpm the promisor of a note to one of three sureties; the mortgagor afterwards became insolvent; the assignee of his estate took and sold the property; and the mortgagee brings trover against him. Held, the action was maintainable, to recover the proceeds of the sale, to the amount of the plaintiff's liability on the note; although he had paid no part of it, and the other sureties were equally liable with him, and though the consideration expressed in the mortgage was only equal to one third of the amount for which the note was given. Also, that parol evidence was inadmissible, to prove the mortgagor's intention to secure the plaintiff only to the amount of one third of the note, under the belief that this would fully indemnify him for his liability.2 7. In a mortgage of indemnity, the form of the mortgagee's liability need not be stated with precise accuracy, provided the intention is made to appear. Thus a mortgage was made, reciting that "said Wheeler, Deming & Hortbn have at various times indorsed for the said C. & J. S. Bedlow (the mortgagors) certain and various notes of hand and drafts, checks, &c., made and drawn at various times during the past six months. Now if the said, &c., shall pay, &c., where the said Wheeler, Dem...
"synopsis" may belong to another edition of this title.