Littlefield v. Lemley
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Johnson Circuit Court. — Hon. W. W. Wood, Judge. The note and mortgage from Swaney Lemley were competent evidence in this case, and should not have been stricken out and excluded by the court. At the time said mortgage was given the defendant Swaney Lemley had the farm on which the corn in controversy was grown in his possession, and there was such, a potential existence as to render the mortgage valid in law.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Johnson Circuit Court. — Hon. W. W. Wood, Judge. The note and mortgage from Swaney Lemley were competent evidence in this case, and should not have been stricken out and excluded by the court. At the time said mortgage was given the defendant Swaney Lemley had the farm on which the corn in controversy was grown in his possession, and there was such, a potential existence as to render the mortgage valid in law. Bawlings v. Hunt, 90 N. O. 270; Ootten v. Willoughby, 83 N. O. 75; Harris v. Jones, 83 N. O. 317; Senter v. Mitchell, 16 Fed. Bep.. 206; Trash v. Bennett, 57 Ala. 156;…
1Opinion of the Court
Hill, J. —
This suit originated before a justice of the peace, and is replevin for the recovery of certain corn raised by defendant Lemley in the cropping season of 1896. In February of that year, and before planting time, Lemlqy executed a chattel mortgage to plaintiff Littlefield, covering in terms the crop he (Lemley) was to raise the coming season. Lemley subsequently planted some corn; and during the summer, and while the crop was growing, he placed another chattel mortgage on the corn in favor of T. Gr. Bradley. At gathering time said Bradley took possession of the corn, sold it under…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- France v. ThomasSupreme Court of Missouri · 1885
- Scudder v. BaileyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1896
3Cited by1 opinion
- Swinney v. GoutyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1900