The defendant brought a motion for summary judgment on its counterclaim arising from a mortgage given as security for the assignment of another mortgage.
The plaintiffs alleged that the defendant made misrepresentations about encumbrances on the underlying property and that the agreement did not reflect what was promised.
The court held that the alleged subsequent encumbrances did not materially affect the plaintiffs’ priority or interest, and therefore could not constitute actionable misrepresentations.
The court also found that the handwritten agreement and related oral representations merged into the registered mortgage and that the involvement of independent counsel defeated any non est factum argument.
Finding no genuine issue requiring a trial, the court granted summary judgment on the counterclaim.
