The Federal Reporter with Key-Number Annotations, Volume 250: Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit Courts of Appeals and District Courts of the United States, August-October, 1918. Page: 32
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
250 FEDERAL REPORTER
lege was to be exercised when the subdivisions should be sold and con-
veyed. Delay in the exercise of the privilege was likely to, and did,
mean delay in the payment of part of the purchase price contracted
for by the appellee. In so far as the appellee sustained loss by that de-
lay, he should be compensated for it. The allowance of interest is the
appropriate method of compensating for unwarranted delay in the
payment of money. Appellants would escape the duty of doing equity
if the provision in question is given the effect of entitling them to get
their lands released now upon the payment of the same amounts they
would have had to pay, if they had, exercised the privilege accorded
them when they made their purchases 10 years ago. As the result of
payments on the purchase price made by others, the amount decreed in
appellee's favor is less than the aggregate of what was required to ob-
tain releases of the subdivisions foreclosed when the right to do so ac-
crued, with interest added from the dates of the accrual of that right
to the several purchasers of such subdivisions. It is not made to ap-
pear that the appellee, by contract, estoppel, or otherwise, has lost the
right to have the above-quoted provision of the deed of trust com-
plied with by a subsequent purchaser of part of the tract sold, who
seeks to get a release of his land from the liens securing the purchase
price of the entire tract of which his land was a part.
 But for the above-quoted provision, there could be no question
as to the appellee's right to enforce his deed of trust, for the entire
amount remaining due on the debt secured by it, against the whole or
any part of the unreleased land. In the absence of such a provision, a
mortgagee could gratuitously release any of the land covered by the
mortgage without affecting or impairing his right to enforce the mort-
gage against the part of tht mortgaged land which was not released.
It is suggested that the provision mentioned had the effect, not only of
entitling the grantor in the deed of trust or subsequent purchasers of
parts of the land embraced in it to have such parts released upon pay-
ing proportional parts of the whole purchase price of the incumbered
land, but also of entitling a subsequent purchaser of part of the land
to have the land he purchased released without complying with the
conditions expressed in the deed of trust, if the appellee has released
parts of the land purchased by others without exacting compliance by
them with the conditions on which they were entitled to releases. We
are not of opinion that such effect properly can be given to the provi-
sion in question. It does not purport to put any restriction or limita-
tion on the right of the appellee to release part of the land, gratuitous-
ly if he chooses, without affecting or impairing the right which the
deed of trust gives him against the remainder of the land embraced
by it. The provision granted the privilege of obtaining partial releases
on stated terms. It did not purport to affect the appellee's right to
give releases on different terms. The appellants were not prejudiced
by purchasers of other parts of the mortgaged land getting releases for
nothing, or for less than the mortgagee was entitled to exact. That did
not add to the amounts they were required to pay to get their lands
released. They have nothing to complain of so long as they are per-
mitted to get their lands released on the terms stated in the deed of
Here’s what’s next.
This document can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Legislative Document.
The Federal Reporter with Key-Number Annotations, Volume 250: Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit Courts of Appeals and District Courts of the United States, August-October, 1918., legislative document, 1918; Saint Paul, Minnesota. (digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc38821/m1/47/: accessed October 16, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.