Deseret National Bank v. Kidman
Utah Supreme Court
Appeal from the Eirst District Court, Cache County. — Hon. Charles H. Hart, Judge. Action of replevin. The lower court, on the grounds that the affidavit and acknowledgment of tbe chattel mortgage on the sheep were not in accordance with the law of Idaho and that the mortgage was not sufficient to charge defendants with notice of its existence, instructed the jury to return ¿ verdict for the defendants. Erom such judgment, the plaintiff appealed.
1Dissent
ROLAPP, District Judge.
I dissent from the views expressed by the learned Chief Justice as to the sufficiency of the affidavit attached to the chattel mortgage in question. I fully agree with the opinion expressed by this court in the case of Petrovitzky v. Brigham, 14 Utah 472, 47 Pac. 666, that the words “hinder” and “delay” are practically synonymous terms. Under our statute the use of either word in the affidavit would make it valid, and the use of any additional words, such as “defraud,” -etc., would be treated as mere sur-plusage. Reed v. Worthington, 9 Bosw. 617. But under a statute…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Hoffman, Burneston & Co. v. MackallOhio Supreme Court · 1855
- Crow v. BeardsleySupreme Court of Missouri · 1878
- Pilling v. OtisWisconsin Supreme Court · 1861
- Petrovitzky v. BrighamUtah Supreme Court · 1897
- Read v. WorthingtonThe Superior Court of New York City · 1862