Bollen v. Wilson Creek Union Grain & Trading Co.

Respondent brought this action to foreclose a chattel mortgage executed by one Charles E. Sroufe. The mortgage covered a crop of grain which was raised by Sroufe in the year 1912. The grain was delivered, after harvesting, to the appellant, who bought and paid for a part thereof. The trial judge found that the mortgage was a valid and subsisting lien of which the appellant had *401actual and constructive notice. It is contended that the court’s finding that respondent had given Sroufe permission to sell the grain, and had told appellant’s manager that it might buy the grain, was not well founded.…