Campbell v. Eastman
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Tort, by the mortgagee of certain personal property for its conversion. Trial in the Superior Court, before Sherman, J., who ordered a verdict for the defendant; and the plaintiff alleged exceptions. If the notice required by Pub. Sts. c. 161, § 75, was sufficient, or if the defendant had authority to waive it and the evidence was sufficient to authorize the jury to find a waiver, the verdict was to be set aside; otherwise, it was to stand.
1Opinion of the CourtKnowlton, J.
The principal question in this case is, What is the meaning of the Pub. Sts. c. 161, § 75, as applied to the facts disclosed by the evidence? This statute has been considered and the cases decided under it have been referred to in two recent cases, Wilson v. Crooker, 145 Mass. 571, and Ashcroft v. Simmons, 151 Mass. 497. It can hardly be doubted that the Legislature had two distinct purposes in framing the statute, one to enable creditors with reasonable facility to resort by attachment to mortgaged personal property for the collection of debts against the mortgagor, and the other to secure…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Wilson v. CrookerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1888
- Ashcroft v. SimmonsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1890
- Cutler v. BoydMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1878
3Cited by3 opinions
- Loanes v. GastMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1913
- Magnifico v. NicholsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1928
- Mugford v. Rival Foods, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1939