Henderson v. Gates
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Prairie Circuit Court. M. T. Sanders, Judge. The appellees, F. Gates & Co., were sued by appellants, Henderson, Echols & Co., for the value of two bales of cotton, which had been purchased by them from one Maddox, and upon which appellants claimed to have had a mortgage. On the trial appellants offered their mortgage in evidence, and appellees objecting to its introduction as evidence, the court sustained their objection and excluded it.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Prairie Circuit Court. M. T. Sanders, Judge. The appellees, F. Gates & Co., were sued by appellants, Henderson, Echols & Co., for the value of two bales of cotton, which had been purchased by them from one Maddox, and upon which appellants claimed to have had a mortgage. On the trial appellants offered their mortgage in evidence, and appellees objecting to its introduction as evidence, the court sustained their objection and excluded it. Two defects in the mortgage were insisted on. First — That the description of the crops of corn and cotton was too imperfect to render the…
1Per curiam
Mortgage.
The mortgage offered in evidence sufficiently described the subject mortgaged (Johnson v. Grisard, 51 Ark., 410) and the parties named as mortgagees. Perciful v. Platt, 36 Ark., 456; Kellogg v. Olsen, 34 Minn., 103; Morse v. Carpenter, 19 Vt., 613; Sherry v. Gilmore, 58 Wisc., 332—3; Chicago Lumber Co. v. Ashworth, 26 Kan., 212; Newton v. McKay, 29 Mich., 1; Beaman v. Whitney, 20 Me., 413; Hoffman v. Porter, 2 Brock, 156; Murray v. Blackledge, 71 N. C., 492.
The court erred in refusing to admit the mortgage in evidence.
Reverse and remand for a new trial.
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Murray, Ferris & Co. v. BlackledgeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1874
- Newton v. McKayMichigan Supreme Court · 1874
- Kellogg v. OlsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1885
- Chicago Lumber Co. v. AshworthSupreme Court of Kansas · 1881
- Morse v. CarpenterSupreme Court of Vermont · 1847
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- First Nat. Bank of Bristow v. RogersSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1909
- Neal Gin Co. v. Tradesmen's Nat. BankSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1925
- First National Bank v. Cazort & McGehee Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1916
- Hendren v. WingSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1895