Scudder v. Bailey
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the St. Louis County Circuit Court. — Hon. Rudolph Hiezel, Judge. (1) The clause in the mortgage conveying after-acquired property was valid. Railroad v. Railroad, 108 Mo. 298; Burton v. Sitlington, 30 S. W. Rep. 514-516. (2) The clause in mortgage providing that, as to the merchandise on hand at the time of its execution, and thereafter acquired, the mortgagor had the power of sale and for the proceeds must account to the mortgagees was valid.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the St. Louis County Circuit Court. — Hon. Rudolph Hiezel, Judge. (1) The clause in the mortgage conveying after-acquired property was valid. Railroad v. Railroad, 108 Mo. 298; Burton v. Sitlington, 30 S. W. Rep. 514-516. (2) The clause in mortgage providing that, as to the merchandise on hand at the time of its execution, and thereafter acquired, the mortgagor had the power of sale and for the proceeds must account to the mortgagees was valid. Eubbell v. Allen, 90 Mo. 574; Metmer v. Graham, 57 Mo. 404. (3) The condition in the mortgage, permitting Bailey to replenish his-stock,…
1Opinion of the CourtBiggs, J.
In 1892 the defendant Bailey commenced a retail grocery business in Old Orchard. The plaintiffs, who are wholesale grocery merchants, sold him goods on credit. On the second day of February, 1894, he owed them a balance, on account, of $1,700, for which he executed seventeen notes of $100 each, payable respectively in that many months. To secure these notes Bailey executed a *42chattel mortgage on his stock of goods, furniture and fixtures, and three horses and three delivery wagons. The mortgage, after describing the property then on hand, contained the following additional clause, to wit:…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Wright v. Bircher'sSupreme Court of Missouri · 1880
- Barton v. SitlingtonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1895
- Metzner v. GrahamSupreme Court of Missouri · 1874
- Rutherford v. StewartSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
- France v. ThomasSupreme Court of Missouri · 1885
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Fleisher Bros. v. HindeMissouri Court of Appeals · 1906
- Swinney v. GoutyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1900
- Littlefield v. LemleyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1898
- Baker & Taylor Co. v. SchneiderMissouri Court of Appeals · 1900