SWKN80N V. HALBEBO. 44T �property was not sold in separate' parcels, or tracts, as the statute required; thirdiih&i the redemption of the homestead from the sale enured to the benefit of the bankrupt and bis assigna, and satisfied and cancelled the mortgage, and ail title derived under it. �It is STifScient to say, upon the first two propositions, that the forecloBure was regular. There is no fraud charged, and it does not appear that the other party was prejudiced by the insertion of $50, instead of $25, as attomey's fees. The mistake is not such as will disturb the sale; neither will it be set aside, for the reason that the traots were not sold sep- arately. The section of the law requiring the sale of sepa- rate and distinct tracts in separate parcels is directory, and the sale will not be disturbed unless it was sold fraudulently, or it is shown that the mortgagor or owner of the equity of redemption was privileged thereby. 24 Minn. E. 281. It does not appear that the sale of the separate tracts in a body was the resuit of actual fraud, and it is not shown that Shogren was prejudiced thereby. He made no effort, as before stated, to secure his homestead, which was subject to- the mortgage. �The third proposition cannot be sustained. The assignee redeemed the mortgaged property from the foreclosure sale, by virtue of the bankrupt law, under the order of the court. The equity of redemption to a portion of the mortgaged prop- erty was vested in the assignee as the representative of the estate of the bankrupt, and, under the authority of the bank- rupt act, he was ordered to redeem. The rule in this state is, that a person having an equity of redemption in a part of real estate sold may redeem from the sale, and this prop- erty being sold in a body and for one price, the assignee was compelled, in order to redeem the only property to which he had any right, to pay the fuU amount of the bid, and take a certificate of redemption for the whole property. In doing this he took, by the redemption, block five, (5,) subject to Shogren's right to redeem from him. He was not authorized by this order of the court to redeem for the benefit of any ��� �
