Legal Opinion

Peter Smith & Sons Grocery Co. v. Daily

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided May 14, 1923No. 3808PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DENISON, Circuit Judge.

This case again presents, under slightly new circumstances, the question whether an instrument is a chattel mortgage, which the Michigan laws require to be recorded to make it valid as against creditors, or is a conditional sale contract, which need not be so recorded, which question we have frequently considered, most recently in Smith v. Carukin, 259 Fed. 51, 170 C. C. A. 51, In re Nader, 283 Fed. 742, and Vander Lei v. Blakely, 284 Fed. 516. From our study and review of the Michigan decisions, we were led to the conclusion that prior to the Paul Case, 213 Mich. 609,…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Burgess v. SeligmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
  2. Great Southern Fire Proof Hotel Co. v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
  3. Jones v. Great Southern Fireproof Hotel Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1898
  4. John Deere Plow Co. v. MowryCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1915
  5. National Cash Register Co. v. PaulMichigan Supreme Court · 1921

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Fruehauf Trailer Co. v. BridgeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1936
  2. Harris-Seybold-Potter Co. v. WhitelawCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1932
  3. Grand Rapids Trust Co. v. American Wood Working Machinery Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1925
  4. In re Harmony Theatre Co.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1924
  5. Cooper v. Michigan Artificial Ice Products Co.District Court, D. Michigan · 1930

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

Powered by the Exa API