Legal Opinion

R. P. Harris Motor Co. v. Bailey

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided March 21, 1929No. 7 Div. 876PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ANDERSON, O. J.

The plaintiff had a prioi- mortgage on the truck in question to that of the defendant, and, as the same had been recorded, the defendant had constructive notice of same. The plaintiff’s mortgage described a Ford truck of a certain motor number, and the number so. appeared when plaintiff took his mortgage, but before defendant took its mortgage, the mortgagor removed the motor and placed one of another number in the truck. It is suggested, however, by counsel for appellant that defendant should not be charged with notice of plaintiff’s mortgage, for the reason that the motor…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Stickney v. Dunaway & LambertSupreme Court of Alabama · 1910
  2. J. C. Walden Auto Co. v. MixonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1916
  3. Atkinson v. WigginsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1881
  4. Read v. CokerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1827

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Barnett v. WaddellSupreme Court of Alabama · 1946
  2. La Rue v. Loveman, Joseph &. LoebSupreme Court of Alabama · 1930
  3. Shephard v. Van DorenNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1936

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

Powered by the Exa API