Butler v. Scarboro

1. In the instant trover action for recovery of a black mare mule and a black horse mule, the court did not err in admitting in evidence the promissory note given for the purchase-money, reserving *319title in the payee, on the ground that the description of both animals was legally insufficient. As to the mare mule, the instrument contained an express retention of title, described the animal both as the subject-matter of the conditional sale and as part of “the said stock hereby delivered,” and was sufficient. Parodies v. Warren Co., 53 Ga. App. 457 (186 S. E. 438) ; Reynolds v. Tifton Guano…