Beer v. Aultman-Taylor Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Plaintiff brought this action on February 9, 1882, in the district court for Scott county, to restrain the foreclosure by advertisement of a real-estate mortgage, and for the cancellation of the mortgage and the mortgage notes.
Read the full summary
Plaintiff brought this action on February 9, 1882, in the district court for Scott county, to restrain the foreclosure by advertisement of a real-estate mortgage, and for the cancellation of the mortgage and the mortgage notes. The action was tried by Macdonald, J., who found the following facts: On September 1, 1877, the plaintiff bargained with defendant (a corporation) for an “Aultman-Taylor separator,” and an “AultmanTaylor engine,” at the agreed price of $1,505, and executed and delivered to the defendant three instruments in writing, dated on that day, for the purchase price, each of…
1Opinion of the Court
Berry, J.1
The notes and the chattel mortgage were made by plaintiff at the same time, and as parts of one transaction. They are, therefore, to be read together. So read, they evidence a contract, by the terms of which “The Aultman-Taylor Machine” (as it is styled in the notes) was distinctly recognized by both parties as the property of the plaintiff, and any inference to the contrary which might be drawn from the clause in the notes providing that the title to the machine shall remain in the defendant until the notes are fully paid, is cut off. Hence, the case is not parallel to Third Nat.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Minneapolis Harvester Works v. HallySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1881
- Third National Bank v. ArmstrongSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1879
3Cited by5 opinions
- Intertype Corporation v. PulverDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 1932
- National Cash Register Co. v. NessSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1938
- Little v. WidenerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1930
- Kettwig v. Aero Investment Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1934
- Guaranty Securities Co. v. Exchange State BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1921