Williams v. First National Bank
Oregon Supreme Court
From Grant: George E. Davis, Judge. Statement by Mr. Justice Hailev. sham, the owner thereof, who afterwards mortgaged them to the defendant bank, which claims a right to their possession under its mortgage.
Read the full summary
From Grant: George E. Davis, Judge. Statement by Mr. Justice Hailev. sham, the owner thereof, who afterwards mortgaged them to the defendant bank, which claims a right to their possession under its mortgage. The case was tried by the court without the intervention of a jury, upon an agreed statement of facts, from which it appears that on August 2, 1902, Wickersham gave. plaintiffs a mortgage upon the sheep in controversy to secure the payment of $4,125, part of the purchase price thereof, evidenced by two notes, one for $500 due July 15, 1903, and the other for $3,625 due September 15, 1904,…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Hailey
1. The defendant urges two questions only: “First, was there actual notice to the bank of the existence of plaintiffs’ mortgage at the time of taking its own mortgage? and, second, if there was such notice, was it sufficient to cure the defect in the execution of plaintiff’s mortgage,” caused by the want of an acknowledgment thereto? As stated in the language of .defendant’s brief, “the notice to the cashier was given when one of the plaintiffs presented for collection the $500 note described in plaintiffs’ mortgage and told the cashier the plaintiffs had a mortgage on the sheep of…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Raymond v. FlavelOregon Supreme Court · 1895
- Walker v. GoldsmithOregon Supreme Court · 1886
- Musgrove v. BonserOregon Supreme Court · 1874
- Bohlman v. CoffinOregon Supreme Court · 1873
- Roy & Co. v. Scott, Hartley & Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1895
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Harris v. ReedIdaho Supreme Court · 1912
- Houck v. DarlingOregon Supreme Court · 1964
- Victor Land Co. v. DrakeOregon Supreme Court · 1912