Legal Opinion

First National Bank v. Guntermann

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided December 22, 1892PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Error to Bay. (Cobb, J.) Trover. Defendant brings error. Tbe facts are stated in tbe opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.

One "William H. Oobb, being indebted to the plaintiff in the sum of $7,000, on October 17, 1890, executed to plaintiff a chattel mortgage to secure that amount. Cobb resided in Kalamazoo, but the property mortgaged was in Bay City, where he carried on business. By mistake the mortgage was on the same day filed with the recorder of Bay City, instead of at Kalamazoo, where the law required it to be filed to operate as a notice to creditors. January 7, 1891, plaintiff took possession under its mortgage.

January 8 the Commercial Bank of Bay City sued out a writ of attachment, and placed it in -the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Littauer v. HouckMichigan Supreme Court · 1892

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Detroit Trust Co. v. Detroit City Service Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1933
  2. In re HuxollCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1912
  3. City Bank & Trust Co. v. HurdMichigan Supreme Court · 1914
  4. Heenan v. Forest City Paint & Varnish Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1904
  5. In re Mission Fixture & Mantel Co.District Court, W.D. Washington · 1910

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API