Lienau v. Moran
Supreme Court of Minnesota
ERROR TO THE niSTRICT court OE RAMSEY bouNTY. Points and authorities of Plaintiff in Error: I. — Tbe law of I860 respecting chattel mortgages was not in force at tbe time this mortgage was made.
Read the full summary
ERROR TO THE niSTRICT court OE RAMSEY bouNTY. Points and authorities of Plaintiff in Error: I. — Tbe law of I860 respecting chattel mortgages was not in force at tbe time this mortgage was made. Rev. Stats., p. , seo. ; Constitution of Mmn., a/rt-. 16, seo. 2. Tbe provisions of tbe act apply only to mortgages made after it went into effect, vide section 2. II. — No specific acts or circumstances showing fraud are alleged or proven by tbe Defendants in error — fraud is found by the Court as a conclusion of law. III. — Tbe facts that tbe mortgagor continued in. business with mortgagee, and that…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Oourt
FlaNDBau, <T.
The mortgage executed by Charles Lienau and wife to the Plaintiff on the 6th day of *485March, 1860, was governed by tbe old Statute of 1851 as to filing — tbe new act of 1860, approved on tbe same day tbe mortgage was executed, not taking effect until thirty days after its passage. Had tbe mortgagee filed bis mortgage under tbe old act (Comp. Stats., p. 348, sec. 3,) tbe mortgagor might have retained tbe possession of tbe chattels without tbe mortgage becoming thereby entirely vitiated. In such case tbe possession of the goods by tbe mortgagor made tbe mortgage prima…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Eddy, Fenner & Co. v. CaldwellSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1862