Show 0111N11F HI MAIM 111I1r4111 1 IVcMou lifnlirtJ by the I iDIrrmll Court The Pupreme court tn in opinion handed down rtilerday amrmtd tit Julgment of tin lower court In the ca 10 of Image McKay va lUlHim II Ward rt at 1 appellant This action wife for the fomIourl ot a certain maritime clvtn lo JIcKoy ly Wrd still hit Wife 1 anl for a dt flclencx J i Ignwnt agatnet dndht Joseph lltlnip Mlo look the rroitrty subject ta tho mortgage and aaiunw1 an ll agreed to pay the aame A decree Was nd1 anot deficiency judgment nf HoSljvTai given Against Ilolnp from ftblrh judgment he appealed Juill t Miner who role 1 tht opinion ftndi that under the falls 1 In I tin rose the Malntllt McKay Kai entitled to a deficiency Julgmtnt on the question vihtthir the oldies lion niaumtt ty one who unhaen i roo 4h n rlgaget Promising and agree for u conil lerall n to pay II t m rlgagt debt Hull tie l held to tie I available to title mortgagee or life assignee In all cases pr only In came when the turchawra Immediate I grantor was peraona1ly lln I Hi far the payment ot = Jui lice I Miner nn U there ll I 11 conflict ot null nrlllei I I upon tht subject Alter ei mining all the authorlllei I he court ll ot the opinion that When n raH In I agreea a v lo 14Y i the debt film Of toollono a third per1 ion ni part if the conilnrrallon for Ili I ll porous there ll no necenlly far Ally consideration I to logo from uch third Person i or tile debtor to euih grantet to support such agreement Juitlct Haikln concur In the onlnlon llr but Chief Justice Glitch 1 orinlon r |