
    Thomas Sheridan vs. Patrick Welch.
    Exclusive possession of land by a mortgagor, with a claim of exclusive ownership, does not in itself amount to a disseisin of the mortgagee, so as to invalidate a transfer of the mortgage title or prevent the valid execution of a power of sale contained in the mortgage.
    Whit of entry to recover a parcel of land in Waltham.
    It was agreed that in January 1855 Michael O’Halloran, being the owner of the demanded premises, conveyed them to the Waltham Mutual Loan and Fund Association by a mortgage containing a power of sale ; that in April 1856 O’Halloran conveyed the premises to the tenant, who has since been in the exclusive possession thereof, with a claim of exclusive ownership; and that in May 1862 the mortgagees sold and conveyed the premises under their power of sale to one Gorman, who has since conveyed the same to the demandant.
    Upon these facts judgment was rendered in the superior court for the demandant, and the tenant appealed to this court.
    
      J. Rutter, for the tenant.
    
      J. Q. A. Griffin, for the demandant.
   Hoar, J.

Exclusive possession by a mortgagor or those claiming under him, with a claim of exclusive ownership, does not in itself amount to a disseisin of the mortgagee, so as to invalidate a transfer of the mortgage title. There is nothing in the agreed statement of facts to show that any claim adverse to the mortgage was known to the mortgagee, and the facts do not show that be was disseised. A conveyance by virtue of the power of sale in the mortgage would therefore give a good title to the purchaser, upon which he could maintain a writ of entry against the grantee of the mortgagor.

The statement of facts does not present any question upon the correctness of the proceedings under the power of sale, nor show that it was intended to raise any upon it.

Judgment for the demandant.  