Bank of Benson v. Hove
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Eeplevin, brought in the district court for Swift county, for a horse of the value of $100, plaintiff claiming under a senior, and defendant under a junior, mortgage from one Holzheimer. At the trial, before Powers, J., the plaintiff had a verdict. The defendant appeals from an order refusing a new trial.
1Opinion of the CourtVanderburgh, J.
The horse in controversy here is claimed by the plaintiff under a chattel mortgage, which, it is alleged, covered the same, and other personal property. The rest of the property included therein had been, prior to this action, taken and sold, and the net proceeds applied on the mortgage debt, leaving a balance still due. The defendant admits that the balance due was the sum of $51.65, while the plaintiff claims to be entitled to deduct $10 from the proceeds of the sale, under the stipulation in the mortgage allowing him an attorney’s fee to that amount, which the. defendant is unwilling to…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Tuthill v. . MorrisNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
- Stevens v. HamptonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1870
- Myer v. HartMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
- Titus v. JohnsonTexas Supreme Court · 1878
- Soles v. SheppardIllinois Supreme Court · 1881
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Clements v. Texas Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1925
- Horbach v. TyrrellNebraska Supreme Court · 1896
- Boswell v. First National Bank of LaramieWyoming Supreme Court · 1907
- Moore v. NormanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
- Armstrong v. CombsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.