Plant v. Shryock

Decided April 15, 1885

Mississippi Supreme Court · decided 1885-04-15

Hon. B. T. Kimbrough, Chancellor. On the 9th of February, 1870, Susan L. Atkinson bought a tract of land and paid for it with money borrowed of Jacob Thompson. On the same day Susan L. Atkinson and her husband, R. E. Atkinson, executed a deed of trust on this land to secure their promissory note to Thompson for the money borrowed of him, the 9th of February, 1871, being the date fixed for the maturity of the note.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently October 1886

1 state decisions

Relies on Benson v. Stewart · Green v. Board of Supervisors

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1885-04-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Campbell, J.,

¶1delivered the opinion of the court.

¶2The sale of the land was after the valid renewal and extension of the mortgage debt which bound it, aud the purchasers took it subject to the incumbrance, which, being enforceable against Mrs. Phipps and husband, may be enforced against their vendees. Benson v. Stewart, 30 Miss. 49; Green v. Supervisors, 58 Miss. 337.

¶3The deed of trust was recorded and there was no entry of satisfaction on the record, and although at the date of the purchase of the land from Phipps the note appeared on its face to be barred by the statute of limitations, in fact it was not barred, having been kept alive by a new promise in writing as required by law, and it was incumbent on a purchaser from Phipps to pursue the inquiry suggested by the state of the record, and ascertain if, notwithstanding the apparent bar of the note, it was in truth still a valid subsisting debt.

¶4Affirmed.