Legal Opinion

Titsworth v. Frauenthal

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided May 15, 1889PublishedCited by 3 opinions

APPEAL from Logan Circuit Court. John S. Little, Judge. Frauenthal brought replevin in a justice’s court against Titsworth for two bales of cotton. On appeal to the Circuit. Court the action was tried by the court, which found that in 1886 Totten Jones was a tenant upon Titsworth’s farm, and raised five bales of cotton, of which the two bales in controversy were a part.

Read the full summary

APPEAL from Logan Circuit Court. John S. Little, Judge. Frauenthal brought replevin in a justice’s court against Titsworth for two bales of cotton. On appeal to the Circuit. Court the action was tried by the court, which found that in 1886 Totten Jones was a tenant upon Titsworth’s farm, and raised five bales of cotton, of which the two bales in controversy were a part. That a few days before the institution of this suit, Titsworth purchased of Jones in one transaction all of said cotton, and after deducting from the price thereof the rent due to him and the amount of a bill for supplies…

1Per curiam

Replevin : For interest in crop. The plaintiff’s title to the two bales of cotton replevied, was no greater than to the other bales of the same lot. The landlord’s lien was extinguished, as the court held, by the transfer of the cotton upon which the lien existed, but the title of the landlord to an undivided interest in the cotton, equal in value to the amount of the lien extinguished, became absolute by his purchase. As to the remaining interest, he was only a purchaser whose rights were subject, to the mortgage. But the mortgagee had not a superior title to any particular part of the lot…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. Garrett v. McAteeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1938
  2. Moseley v. CheathamSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1896
  3. Vermont Loan & Trust Co. v. CardinWashington Supreme Court · 1898

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

Powered by the Exa API