In Baldwin v. Tuttle, 23 Iowa 66, it was held that it was not necessary that such notice be filed or marked "filed with the clerk" within the time.
Summary of this case from Hampton v. Des Moines & Central Iowa Ry. Co.Decided June 10, 1975
ORDER AFFIRMED
In Baldwin v. Tuttle, 23 Iowa 66, it was held that it was not necessary that such notice be filed or marked "filed with the clerk" within the time.
Summary of this case from Hampton v. Des Moines & Central Iowa Ry. Co.In Baldwin v. Tuttle, 215 Ill. App. 57, upon a state of facts very similar to the case at bar, the court held that the holder of the deficiency judgment was not entitled to the rents and profits, and that similar language used in the mortgage, except as to payment to the purchaser, did not effect a pledge or mortgage of the rents and profits.
Summary of this case from Straus v. BrackenFull title:BALDWIN AQUARIUM CENTER v. COLLINS TUTTLE CO., INC
Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Date published: Jun 10, 1975
Davis v. Dale, 150 Ill. 239; Stevens v. Hadfield, 178 id. 532." Longley v. Wilk, 171 Ill. App. 419, 425;…
Straus v. BrackenBut from the discussions in Schaeppi v. Bartholomae, supra, and Standish v. Musgrove, supra, there have…