Nott v. Burgess
Hawaii Supreme Court
Appeal erom the Chancellor. If there is no express stipulation to the contrary, the right of possession of mortgaged chattels vests in the mortgagee immediately upon the execution of the mortgage ; only the right to redeem passes to the assignees in Bankruptcy of the mortgagor. Fallon vs. Robinson, 2 Hawn., 227, approved.
Read the full summary
Appeal erom the Chancellor. If there is no express stipulation to the contrary, the right of possession of mortgaged chattels vests in the mortgagee immediately upon the execution of the mortgage ; only the right to redeem passes to the assignees in Bankruptcy of the mortgagor. Fallon vs. Robinson, 2 Hawn., 227, approved. Demurrer to a bill in equity sustained, on the ground that plaintiff had an adequate remedy at law; distinguishing Ahuna vs. Kaua-hikaua, 3 Hawn., 730. Decision oe the Chancellor, Appealed erom. This is a bill of John Nott, a mortgagee of certain goods, being the tools and…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion of the Full Court, by
Preston, J.
This is an appeal by the plaintiff against a decree made by the Chancellor, on the 22d day of June last, whereby he dismissed the bill for want of Equity.
On a perusal of the papers in the case and the opinion of the Chancellor, we think the decree was properly made; at the same time we adopt the principle stated by the Chancellor, as to the effect of a chattel mortgage upon the property comprised therein.
The appeal is therefore dismissed with costs.
2Cited by4 opinions
- George Hess v. Sam Paulo, Sr.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1949
- McCandless v. Lee ChewHawaii Supreme Court · 1905
- Inter-Island Telegraph Co. v. LiliuokalaniHawaii Supreme Court · 1905
- Peabody v. Leong YenHawaii Supreme Court · 1921