Beasley v. Burroughs & Taylor Co.
Supreme Court of Alabama
Appeal from Geneva Circuit Court. Heard before Hon. H. A. Pearce. Suit by the Burroughs & Taylor Company against J. T. Beasley and another for the breach of a forthcoming bond in attachment. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Geneva Circuit Court. Heard before Hon. H. A. Pearce. Suit by the Burroughs & Taylor Company against J. T. Beasley and another for the breach of a forthcoming bond in attachment. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Transferred from the Court of Appeals under Act April 18, 1911 (Laws 1911, p. 450) § 6. The attachment was issued at the instance of plaintiffs against W. C. Parish and levied upon a lot of dry goods, and the bond was given for the forthcoming of the goods if found liable to attachment as the property of W. C. Parish. It is alleged that defendants failed to…
1Opinion of the CourtMayfield, J.
This appeal involves only one question; that is, the validity of a mortgage, as against creditors of the mortgagor.
The mortgage was chiefly on a stock of goods being used in trade in a mercantile business by the mortgagor, though there was also other property embraced therein. The mortgage was executed to secure existing indebtedness, as well as debts to be incurred in the future. The instrument contained, among others the following provisions:
“It is understood and agreed by the mortgagors and J. T. Beasley that the proceeds from the sale of the said stock of goods is to be placed to the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Louisville & Nashville R. R. v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1911
- Bamberger v. SchoolfieldSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Murray, Dibrell & Co. v. McNealy & CuretonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1888
- Roden & Co. v. Norton & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1900
- Birmingham Dry Goods Co. v. Roden & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1895
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.