closure void where the notice correctly describes the mortgagee, the date of making and filing the mortgage, and the book and page where the same has been recorded, and where further, no prejudice is shown.
Mortgages—dating foreclosure notice one day prior to filing assignment held not to invalidate foreclosure.
3. The dating of a mortgage foreclosure notice one day anterior to the time of filing for record the assignment of such mortgage, which time of filing is described in the notice does not render the foreclosure invalid where it appears that such dating is a mere clerical error.
Opinion filed March 17, 1921.
Action to determine adverse claims in District Court, Logan County, Allen J. The plaintiff has appealed from the Judgment and it has demanded a trial de novo.
Affirmed.
A. B. Atkins, and F. J. Graham, for the appellant.
“The proceedings in foreclosure by advertisement is one in derogation of common law and the remedy must be strictly and closely pursued.”
Clifford v. Tomlison, (Minn.) 64 N. W. 381; 84 N. W. 1024 (Minn.); 16 N. W. 499 (Minn.).
The issuance of the notice of sale was a commencement of the foreclosure proceedings and that under the statute at that time it was essential that an assignment of the mortgage be placed on record showing the record title ownership in the mortgage to be the party signing the foreclosure notice.
3 Dak. page 345, 17 N. D. page 235 and Section 8077, C. L. 1913.
Burfening & Conmy, for respondent.
The true rule is whether or not the inaccuracies in the notice are such as misled or prejudice the parties or the public, and that rule is set forth in McCardia v. Billings, 10 N. D. 373; Inv. Co. v. Shepard, 66 N. W. 451; Colgan v. McNamara, 16 R. I. 554; 18 Atl. 157; Hoffman v. Anthony, 6 R. I. 282.
Notice of foreclosure sale which did not properly name the mortgagees was held to comply sufficiently with the statute.
Cook v. Lockerby, 16 N. D. 19.
