Watson v. May
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Ashley Circuit Court. Marcus L. Hawkins, Judge. 1. Appellant’s mortgage bound the crop the same as if it had already been in existence. Sand. & H. Dig., sec. 5100; 32 Ark. 598. The title vested in appellant from the date of its execution, and any contract made with appellee afterwards was subject to appellant’s rights.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Ashley Circuit Court. Marcus L. Hawkins, Judge. 1. Appellant’s mortgage bound the crop the same as if it had already been in existence. Sand. & H. Dig., sec. 5100; 32 Ark. 598. The title vested in appellant from the date of its execution, and any contract made with appellee afterwards was subject to appellant’s rights. Sand. & H. Dig., sec. 5102, 5105. The laborer’s lien act makes the lien good between employer and laborer, but no third party shall be prejudiced by the existence of such lien unless a copy is filed in the recorder’s office. Acts 1875, p. 231. There can be no…
1Opinion of the CourtBattle, J.
One bale of cotton, of the value of $34,
is the property in controversy in this action. Appellant, D. E. Watson, claims possession of it under a mortgage executed to him by R. P. Brown, and appellee, J. W. May, says that it was the product of labor performed by him in the service of Brown, and was received by him in payment of the amount due him for such labor.
No bill of exceptions was filed ; and the facts and the declarations of law, upon which a reversal is asked, are set out in the judgment of the court. The facts, as found by the court, are as follows: “(1) That the bale of cotton in…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Meyer v. BloomSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1881
3Cited by1 opinion
- Carraway v. PhippsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1935