Legal Opinion
Mitschele-Baer v. Livingston Sand
New Jersey Court of Chancery
Decided May 11, 1931PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The defendant company's assets are in the hands of a receiver. Smith Engineering Works has a chattel mortgage made by the company on some of the assets and petitions that they be turned over to it. The receiver resists, claiming the chattel mortgage to be void for non-compliance with the Chattel Mortgage act.
The chattel mortgage was made to secure seven installment notes given for the purchase price of goods mortgaged, and the court's duty is to uphold it if legally permissible. American SodaFountain Co. v. Stolzenbach, 75 N.J. Law 721. The objections to the mortgage are various.
Failure to…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- People Ex Rel. Kenyon v. . SutherlandNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
- Lessler v. Paterson National BankNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1925
- Watson v. RowleyNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1902
- Pincus v. U.S. Dyeing and Cleaning WorksNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1926
- Lessler v. Paterson National BankSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1926
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Moore v. Preiss Trading Corp.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1936
- Stark v. FLEMINGTON NAT. BANK AND TRUST CO.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1955
- Melillo v. DeVincenzoNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1935