Plano Manufacturing Co. v. Griffith
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Wright District Court. — Hon. D. D. Miracle, Judge. Tiie defendant, who is a constable, levied an execution in favor of Minor & Jones and against one Shaver, upon a harvester and binder. Plaintiff brought this action to recover the value of the machine under a chattel mortgage executed by Shaver to plaintiff. There was a trial by jury, and a verdict and judgment for defendant. Plaintiff appeals.
1Opinion of the CourtRothrock, J.
*103i chattelmort ' gage: insufflcient description : paroi evidence to noticeaotual *102— I. . The mortgage upon which the plaintiff relied was indefinite in its description. It *103described the mortgaged property as “one six 1-2 foot cut Plano harvester and binder.” it contained no other words of description. x That this description was insufficient to charge third persons with constructive notice of the mortgage there can be no question. See Hayes v. Wilcox, 61 Iowa, 732 ; Rhutasel v. Stephens, 68 Iowa, 627; Ormsby v. Nolan, 69 Iowa, 130 ; and many other cases in this court. In all these cases the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Rhutasel v. StephensSupreme Court of Iowa · 1886
- Ormsby Bros. v. NolanSupreme Court of Iowa · 1886
- Barr v. CannonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1886
- Clapp v. TrowbridgeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1888
- Cummings v. ToveySupreme Court of Iowa · 1874
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Reinstein v. RobertsOregon Supreme Court · 1898
- Fisher v. PorterSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1898
- Simon Casady & Co. v. German Savings BankSupreme Court of Iowa · 1913
- Westinghouse Co. v. McGrathSupreme Court of Iowa · 1906
- Frick v. FritzSupreme Court of Iowa · 1902
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.