Legal Opinion

Forbes v. Parker

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided March 15, 1835PublishedCited by 2 opinions

This was case against a deputy sheriff, for taking forty-eight swine, which had been mortgaged to the plaintiff by Edward Walker, on July 5, 1833, to securé the payment of a promissory note of the same date, payable in six months from that time.

Read the full summary

This was case against a deputy sheriff, for taking forty-eight swine, which had been mortgaged to the plaintiff by Edward Walker, on July 5, 1833, to securé the payment of a promissory note of the same date, payable in six months from that time. The trial was before Wilde J. The mortgage deed, which was duly recorded on the dav of its date, in the records of the town of Charlestown, where the mortgager then resided, contained a stipulation that until there should be a default in the payment of the note after it became due, the mortgager should retain possession of the swine, for the purpose…

1Opinion of the Court

Putnam J.

delivered the opinion of the Court. The question,-whether an action will lie for damages to a reversionary interest in personal property, was settled in the affirmative by the case of Ayer v. Bartlett, 9 Pick. 156. We have reexamined that case, and have no desire to disturb the decision. Within a few months after it was pronounced, the legislature passed “ a bill relating to mortgages and pledges of personal property and property subject to any lien created by law.” St. 1829, c. 124. And the mortgage mentioned m the case at bar, was made more than two years after the passing of that…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. a JuvenileMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1989
  2. Reynolds v. MortonWyoming Supreme Court · 1916

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

Powered by the Exa API