Schrider v. Tighe
Nebraska Supreme Court
Error from the district court of Cass county. Tried below before Chapman, J. The opinion contains a statement of the case. Though a chattel mortgage, absolute in form and given for a definite sum as being due from, the mortgagor, was in fact given only to indemnify the mortgagee against liability as joint maker with the mortgagor on certain notes, yet this would not invalidate the mortgage, if in fact a bona fide liability existed upon such notes.
Read the full summary
Error from the district court of Cass county. Tried below before Chapman, J. The opinion contains a statement of the case. Though a chattel mortgage, absolute in form and given for a definite sum as being due from, the mortgagor, was in fact given only to indemnify the mortgagee against liability as joint maker with the mortgagor on certain notes, yet this would not invalidate the mortgage, if in fact a bona fide liability existed upon such notes. (Warren v. His Creditors, 28 Pac. Rep. [Wash.], 257.) The evidence of fraud given upon the trial cannot be taken to affect or impair the title of…
1Opinion of the Court
Ryan, C.
All essential facts and the sole question involved in this case are stated in the brief of plaintiff in error in the following language: “This is an action in replevin brought by Emil Schrider to obtain the possession of a quantity of ice, upon which he held a subsisting mortgage at the time the property was replevied, which mortgage was dated the 16th day of May, 1891, and filed in the county clerk’s office on the 20th day of May, 1891. This mortgage was given by Charles F.'Grothe and Etta S. Grothe to secure two notes to the First National Bank of Weeping Water; one for $225,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Davis v. ScottNebraska Supreme Court · 1887
- Connelly v. EdgertonNebraska Supreme Court · 1887
- Fitzgerald v. MeyerNebraska Supreme Court · 1888
- Sonnenschein v. BartelsNebraska Supreme Court · 1893