Legal Opinion

Smith-Wallace Shoe Co. v. Wilson

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided November 4, 1895PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Appeal from the Clay Circuit Court. — Hon. E. J. Bboaddus, Judge. (1) A mortgage to secure future advances is valid. Foster v Reynolds, 38 Mo. 553; Jones on Chattel Mortgages, secs. 94, 95, 97. (2) The fact that a mortgage is to cover future additions to the property does not render it fraudulent-on void.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the Clay Circuit Court. — Hon. E. J. Bboaddus, Judge. (1) A mortgage to secure future advances is valid. Foster v Reynolds, 38 Mo. 553; Jones on Chattel Mortgages, secs. 94, 95, 97. (2) The fact that a mortgage is to cover future additions to the property does not render it fraudulent-on void. State v. lasher, 31 Mo. 441; Voorhis v. Fang dorf, 31 Mo. 452; State v. Byrne > 35 Mo. 147; Drug U (1) A conveyance creating a lien upon personality for an indefinite period, the natural operation of which is to the benefit of the grantor, is fraudulent and void as to his creditors. State to…

1Opinion of the CourtEllison, J.

This action is attachment, wherein a lot of personal property, consisting of a stock of goods and fixtures', were attached, on the ground of an alleged fraudulent mortgage. The defendant filed a plea in abatement and on the trial thereof the circuit court declared the chattel mortgage fraudulent in law upon its face. We set out the portions of the mortgage necessary to construe its effect:

“Know all men, etc., that I, James Wilson, etc., in consideration of the sum of $2,360 to me paid by the Kidder Savings Bank, of Kidder, Missouri, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, and of the…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Mitchell v. WinslowU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Maine · 1843
  2. McCaffrey v. . WoodinNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
  3. Borden v. CroakIllinois Supreme Court · 1889
  4. Wright v. Bircher'sSupreme Court of Missouri · 1880
  5. Bullene v. BarrettSupreme Court of Missouri · 1885

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. In Re SchindlerDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 1963
  2. Tobin v. KampeCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1942
  3. Rice Bros. v. Davis, McDonald & DavisMissouri Court of Appeals · 1903
  4. Williams v. W. W. Kimball Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1915

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API