Joslin v. Teats
Colorado Court of Appeals
Appeal from the County Court of Arapahoe County. Ou the 13th day of August, 1891, Mrs. Mattie J. McGee -was the owner of certain household goods, and, needing money, borrowed from appellee, giving her note, payable one year after date, for $500, secured by a chattel mortgage. The mortgage provided, for the retention of -the possession by the mortgagor until money became due. At the maturity of the note — ¡August 13,1892 — other goods had been added.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the County Court of Arapahoe County. Ou the 13th day of August, 1891, Mrs. Mattie J. McGee -was the owner of certain household goods, and, needing money, borrowed from appellee, giving her note, payable one year after date, for $500, secured by a chattel mortgage. The mortgage provided, for the retention of -the possession by the mortgagor until money became due. At the maturity of the note — ¡August 13,1892 — other goods had been added. More money was needed by Mrs. McGee, and the former loan . remained unpaid. She made three promissory notes,.payable to appellee, — one for $340,…
1Opinion of the CourtReed, J.
•We are at a loss to understand upon what theory appellants base their claim for a reversal of the judgment as to the •ownership of the goods in controversy. Tlie-notes and chattel mortgage had-beenlong due;- possession taken long pre*533vious; part of goods sold, and proceeds applied; and-the balance,, when attached, were in a warehouse, stored by appellee. No evidence was introduced attacking the bona-fides of the transaction, challenging the amount óf money advanced, or the balance of over $400, remaining due- and unpaid. The manager for appellants testified that he knew the goods had been…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Agee v. TRUSTEES OF PEN. BD. OF CUNNINGHAM FIRE PDColorado Court of Appeals · 1974
- Williams v. Fidelity & Deposit Co. of MarylandSupreme Court of Colorado · 1908
- Spencer v. MurphyColorado Court of Appeals · 1895
- Spencer v. MurphyColorado Court of Appeals · 1895
- United Power Co. v. MathenyOhio Supreme Court · 1909