Reports of Cases at Law and in Equity Determined by the Supreme Court of the State of Iowa Volume 25 (Paperback)

,
This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1892 edition. Excerpt: ... db 1llcGr-ary, for the appellants, cited v. Solace, 23 Verm. 229; R/zines v. Phelps, 3 Gilm. 464; 1 Par. Con. 529. Brown ct: Ifnowlee for the appellee. Baez, J.---The main question raised in the record was determined by this court in the case of Smith v. McLean, 1. Mon-mmz: 24 Iowa, 322. We held in that case that a of chattels: lexlocl. mortgage of personal property, executed and recorded in another State in accordance with the laws thereof (the property when mortgaged being within such State), has the same force and effect to bind the property when removed to this State, and will be enforced here, as under the laws of the State where it was executed. This doctrine must be considered the settled rule in this State. The defendants counsel cite 1?/tines v. Phelps, 3 Gilm. 464, in which it is held that the retention of the possesI.----retention sion of mortgaged property by the mortgagor gimitdtdi. beyond the term stipulated, renders the mort Gardner v. Baker. gage fraudulent and void as to creditors and purchasers. If this be now the rule in Illinois it is not applicable to the case made by the record. The mortgagor removed the property before the debt became due. Until the maturity of the debt he could, under the mortgage, retain the property in his possession. The removal of the property was without the knowledge or consent of the mortgagee, who used proper diligence to recover it. Gertainly the possession of the property by the mortgagor beyond the time stipulated, against the consent of the mortgagee, and in spite of his efforts to recover it, would not defeat his rights thereto. The rule of the authority cited is applicable only to cases where the mortgagor retains possession with the permission and consent of the 1....

R865

Or split into 4x interest-free payments of 25% on orders over R50
Learn more

Discovery Miles8650
Mobicred@R81pm x 12* Mobicred Info
Free Delivery
Delivery AdviceOut of stock

Toggle WishListAdd to wish list
Review this Item

Product Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1892 edition. Excerpt: ... db 1llcGr-ary, for the appellants, cited v. Solace, 23 Verm. 229; R/zines v. Phelps, 3 Gilm. 464; 1 Par. Con. 529. Brown ct: Ifnowlee for the appellee. Baez, J.---The main question raised in the record was determined by this court in the case of Smith v. McLean, 1. Mon-mmz: 24 Iowa, 322. We held in that case that a of chattels: lexlocl. mortgage of personal property, executed and recorded in another State in accordance with the laws thereof (the property when mortgaged being within such State), has the same force and effect to bind the property when removed to this State, and will be enforced here, as under the laws of the State where it was executed. This doctrine must be considered the settled rule in this State. The defendants counsel cite 1?/tines v. Phelps, 3 Gilm. 464, in which it is held that the retention of the possesI.----retention sion of mortgaged property by the mortgagor gimitdtdi. beyond the term stipulated, renders the mort Gardner v. Baker. gage fraudulent and void as to creditors and purchasers. If this be now the rule in Illinois it is not applicable to the case made by the record. The mortgagor removed the property before the debt became due. Until the maturity of the debt he could, under the mortgage, retain the property in his possession. The removal of the property was without the knowledge or consent of the mortgagee, who used proper diligence to recover it. Gertainly the possession of the property by the mortgagor beyond the time stipulated, against the consent of the mortgagee, and in spite of his efforts to recover it, would not defeat his rights thereto. The rule of the authority cited is applicable only to cases where the mortgagor retains possession with the permission and consent of the 1....

Customer Reviews

No reviews or ratings yet - be the first to create one!

Product Details

General

Imprint

Rarebooksclub.com

Country of origin

United States

Release date

2013

Availability

Supplier out of stock. If you add this item to your wish list we will let you know when it becomes available.

First published

2013

Authors

,

Dimensions

246 x 189 x 11mm (L x W x T)

Format

Paperback - Trade

Pages

202

ISBN-13

978-1-234-22817-0

Barcode

9781234228170

Categories

LSN

1-234-22817-3



Trending On Loot