Kearney v. Moose
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Conway Circuit Court. Hon. 0. B. Moore, Special Judge. Mortgagee not entitled to back rents or profits on foreclosure. Jones, on Mort., sees. 670, 671 ; 3 Ind., eh. 186 ; 91, U. 8. (1 Otto.) 603; 5 Bish., 237. The jurisdiction of the Chancery Court was ample; no attachment necessary.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Conway Circuit Court. Hon. 0. B. Moore, Special Judge. Mortgagee not entitled to back rents or profits on foreclosure. Jones, on Mort., sees. 670, 671 ; 3 Ind., eh. 186 ; 91, U. 8. (1 Otto.) 603; 5 Bish., 237. The jurisdiction of the Chancery Court was ample; no attachment necessary. Éesides it was not in this case authorized by the acts under which it was brought, (acts of 1861, p. 101, Gantt’s Digest.) Fletcher & Hotze had not the landlord’s lien ; it belonged to the estate ; Gill no party to the transfer of the claim. Hence the giving and refusing of the instructions were…
1Opinion of the CourtEnglish, C. J.
This action was brought by James M. Moose and Carroll Armstrong, as receivers in chancery, against John W. Grill for rent, and an attachment sued out under the landlord’s lien act. Cotton and com were attached and bonded by defendant.
Defendant filed a motion to quash the attachment, for informality of the affidavit, &c. Plaintiffs filed an amended affidavit, which defendant moved to strike out, but the-motion was not acted on by the Court.
Defendant filed an answer to the complaint, traversing its allegations, &c.
Pending the suit Grill was adjudged a bankrupt, and Win. Kearney, his assignee,…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Blackburn v. MorrisonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
- Leforce v. HaymesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1909
- City of Monticello v. KimbroSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1943
- American Ins. Co. of Newark, N.J. v. DuttonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1931
- Baker v. MartinSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.