King v. Hubbell
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Iosco. Replevin by Hubbell for goods seized by King under a writ of attachment. Hubbell claimed them under a chattel mortgage given him by his son two days before the attachment issued, to secure him for indorsements and for the purchase price of a quantity of railroad stock which he had shortly before sold his son at par. The goods constituted the latter’s stock in trade. Plaintiff recovered and defendant brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtCooley, J.
We are not satisfied that the circuit judge was justified in taking this case from the jury on the facts. ' It cannot be said that there were no facts and circumstances in evidence calculated to cast suspicion on the bona fides of the mortgage. The mortgagor was the son of the plaintiff below, and áceording to his own evidence had started in business on money borrowed from the plaintiff but a short time before, and there is nothing in the case to show that either father or son had reason to believe that the son had made money in his business. Under these circumstances that the father should…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Worthington v. HannaMichigan Supreme Court · 1871
- Haynes v. LeppigMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
- Cary v. HewittMichigan Supreme Court · 1872
3Cited by15 opinions
- Wood v. WeimarSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Louden v. VintonMichigan Supreme Court · 1896
- Ganong v. GreenMichigan Supreme Court · 1888
- Showman v. LeeMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
- Pinconning State Bank v. HenryMichigan Supreme Court · 1932
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.