McRea v. Merrifield
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Clay Circuit Court. Hon. W. H. Cate, Judge. 1. A fair interpretation of the contract shows that the title passed to Erwin & Nesbit, plaintiffs reserving only a security in the nature of a mortgage, which, not being recorded, was void as against appellants. The proof shows that plaintiff never relied on the condition reserving title, but that the delivery was unconditional, and a complete sale.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Clay Circuit Court. Hon. W. H. Cate, Judge. 1. A fair interpretation of the contract shows that the title passed to Erwin & Nesbit, plaintiffs reserving only a security in the nature of a mortgage, which, not being recorded, was void as against appellants. The proof shows that plaintiff never relied on the condition reserving title, but that the delivery was unconditional, and a complete sale. The evidence also required a showing of solvency on the part of the vendees, and looked to other property than the machinery for the security of the notes. The contract is also indorsed :…
1Opinion of the CourtCockrill, C. J.
The appellees (the plaintifis below) brought an action of replevin against the appellants to recover possession of an engine, a saw mill and a ,lot of tools, etc. A jury being waived, the court found the facts as follows :
“That plaintifis on order shipped the mill and other property to Erwin & Nisbet under a contract of sale, in which it was expressly agreed that the title should not pass from the plaintifis to the purchasers until the purchase money was fully paid-. This is shown by the contract which is admitted in evidence. That the purchase money was never paid in full is alleged in the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Bailey v. HerveyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1883
- Carter v. KingmanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
- McIntosh v. HillSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1886
- Clayton v. . HesterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1879
- Taylor v. County Commissioners of WorcesterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
3Cited by14 opinions
- Smith v. BarberIndiana Supreme Court · 1899
- Herring-Marvin Co. v. SmithOregon Supreme Court · 1903
- Lockwood Bros. v. Frisco Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
- Turk v. CarnahanIndiana Court of Appeals · 1900
- Sunny South Lumber Co. v. Neimeyer Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1896
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.