Barr v. Cannon
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Mahaska District Court. Action to recover tlie value of certain corn levied upon by plaintiff as sheriff, which was taken by defendants, and converted to their own use. There was a judgment upon a verdict for plaintiff. Defendants appeal.
1Opinion of the Court
Beok J.
i chattel sumcientde-" senption. I. The defendants in their answer to the petition allege that they were owners of the corn in controversy, and in possession of it under a chattel mortgage, of which plaintiff had full notice, and deny that plaintiff made a levy upon the corn. The district court correctly held that the defendant’s mortgage was invalid, upon the ground that it does *21not sufficiently describe the property intended to be conveyed; the description being “all the grain, oats, wheat, flax and corn raised ” on certain land. The mortgage fails to state the year or time in which…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Eggert v. WhiteSupreme Court of Iowa · 1882
3Cited by14 opinions
- Barrett v. FischSupreme Court of Iowa · 1889
- McConnell v. LangdonIdaho Supreme Court · 1891
- Plano Manufacturing Co. v. GriffithSupreme Court of Iowa · 1888
- State v. FowlerCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1898
- Castle v. GleasonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1913
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.