Legal Opinion

Durbin v. Haines

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided January 10, 1885No. 10,577PublishedCited by 3 opinions

From the Eipley Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the Court

Black, C. —

The appellee brought suit upon a promissory-note made to him by the appellant Durbin, and to foreclose a chattel mortgage executed by the maker to the pay j to secure the payment of said note, it being alleged that the other appellants, William Wheeler, Henry Weber, sheriff of Ripley county, and Francis Adkinson, claimed some interest in the mortgaged’ property, but that they had no interest as against the appellee.

- Durbin made default. Adkinson pleaded that he had a mortgage on the same property, but that his lien was junior. to that of the appellee. Wheeler and Weber answered…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Godman v. SmithIndiana Supreme Court · 1861
  2. Willson v. BinfordIndiana Supreme Court · 1876
  3. Terrell v. State ex rel. GrubbsIndiana Supreme Court · 1879
  4. Clark v. WrightIndiana Supreme Court · 1879
  5. Zug v. LaughlinIndiana Supreme Court · 1864

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Howard Dragstrem v. Richard E. Obermeyer, United States of America, Intervenor-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1977
  2. State ex rel. Hulman v. HarperIndiana Supreme Court · 1889
  3. Wheeler v. HainesIndiana Supreme Court · 1888

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

Powered by the Exa API