The plaintiff brought a motion for summary judgment for possession of six properties and judgment on the covenants of five collateral mortgages.
The defendants opposed the motion, arguing that the transaction was part of a joint venture business arrangement with the plaintiff's principal's son, rather than a conventional mortgage, and disputed that the full $1,100,000 was advanced.
The court applied the 'full appreciation test' under Rule 20 and found no genuine issue requiring a trial for the majority of the claims.
The court held that the mortgages were valid and that most of the funds were advanced as claimed, granting summary judgment for possession and the debt, excluding a disputed $33,000 lender's fee and certain legal accounts.
