¶1decided that the usual decree in such cases, for the payment of the deficiency, upon the confirmation of the report of the sale, in case it should appear from such report that the proceeds of the mortgaged premises were not sufficient to pay the debt and costs, was proper under the provisions of the revised statutes on this subject; and was not erroneous. And that it was not necessary to wait until after the sale of the mortgaged premises before the contingent decree for the payment of such deficiency could be made.
8 Paige Ch. 480
McCarthy v. Graham
Decided August 26, 1840
New York Court of Chancery · decided 1840-08-26
This was an an appeal from a decree of the vice chancellor of the first circuit; and the only question was whether in a mortgage case the court could make a decree against the mortgagor, for the payment of the deficiency, in anticipation of the master’s report.
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently April 1876
1 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1840-08-26
View the full empirical analysis of this case →