Goodrich v. Woodsome
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Bill in Equity, to determine the rights of the parties in certain property conveyed to the plaintiff by the Epping Box & Lumber Co. Hearing by the court, who found that the defendant Hamilton mortgaged his interest in the business and property of a partnership, of which he was a member, to the defendant Woodsome on January 30, 1913, to secure the payment of his note for $1,000. Some time in March, 1913, the partners formed the corporation known as the Epping Box & Lumber…
Read the full summary
Bill in Equity, to determine the rights of the parties in certain property conveyed to the plaintiff by the Epping Box & Lumber Co. Hearing by the court, who found that the defendant Hamilton mortgaged his interest in the business and property of a partnership, of which he was a member, to the defendant Woodsome on January 30, 1913, to secure the payment of his note for $1,000. Some time in March, 1913, the partners formed the corporation known as the Epping Box & Lumber Co., which took over the property and assumed the liabilities of the partnership. The business was a failure and on…
1Opinion of the CourtYoung, J.
It can serve no useful purpose to consider what Woodsome’s rights would have been if the plaintiff had taken the property with knowledge of his claims or if he were not a purchaser for value, for the court has found that neither the plaintiff nor any of the assenting creditors knew of these mortgages on February 21, 1914; and at that time the plaintiff was a purchaser for value. Kenefick v. Perry, 61 N. H. 362. Woodsome’s mortgages, therefore, are invalid in so far as the plaintiff is concerned (P. S., c. 140, s. 12) for the possession of the property was not delivered to and retained by him,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Kenefick v. PerrySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1881
3Cited by1 opinion
- Eldredge Brewing Co. v. Cocheco Bottling Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1918