Southern Lumber Co. v. Pearce
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
1DissentSibley, Circuit Judge
As stated in the court’s opinion: “Ho [Pearce] did agree to deposit the policy with the Southern Lumber Company as security for a past-due debt, and he did do so.” (C. C. A.) 59 F.(2d) 50, 53. This delivery of tlie policy for the purpose of securing Pie *478debt, although there was no new consideration and no written assignment, constituted a valid pledge both under the general law, 49 C. J. Pledges, §§ 28, 35, 49; 37 C. J. Life Insurance, § 134; and under the law of Alabama, McDonald v. McDonald, 215 Ala. 179, 110 So. 291, 293; Hicks v. Meadows, 193 Ala. 246, 69 So. 432; Keeble v. Jones, 187…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Beuttell v. MagoneSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Beuttell v. MagoneSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Empire State Cattle Co. v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Williams v. VreelandSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
- McDonald v. McDonaldSupreme Court of Alabama · 1924
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.