20 A. 198 (Vt. 1890), W. R. Parker v. Perry Chase And Leman Buck

Citation:20 A. 198, 62 Vt. 206
Opinion Judge:MUNSON
Party Name:W. R. PARKER v. PERRY CHASE AND LEMAN BUCK
Attorney:I. N. Chase and Willard Farrington, for the defendants.
Case Date:January 01, 1890
Court:Supreme Court of Vermont
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 198

20 A. 198 (Vt. 1890)

62 Vt. 206

W. R. PARKER

v.

PERRY CHASE AND LEMAN BUCK

Supreme Court of Vermont

January 1, 1890

JANUARY TERM, 1890.

Trover for the conversion of six cows. Heard on referee's report at the September Term, 1889, TYLER, J., presiding. Judgment for the plaintiff. The defendants except. The facts appear in the opinion.

Judgment affirmed.

I. N. Chase and Willard Farrington, for the defendants.

OPINION

MUNSON

This suit is to recover damages for the taking of six cows. The plaintiff claims title as purchaser at an execution sale. The defendants justify the taking under three chattel [62 Vt. 207] mortgages, given by the execution debtor before the attachment. The plaintiff contests the validity of the mortgages as regards the property in dispute. The question is as to the sufficiency of the description.

One mortgage is of "three cows," and another of "five cows," neither containing any further designation. When these mortgages were given, the mortgagor had at least six cows. The remaining mortgage covers "two cows, being the same cows delivered to me by Edwin Strait." At the time this was given, the mortgagor had five cows received from Strait. All the mortgages were duly recorded.

On the hearing before the referee an attempt was made to apply these mortgages to the cows in question. Evidence was taken under objection to ascertain upon which of the mortgagor's cows the mortgages were placed. With this evidence before him, the referee is unable to connect four of the cows in suit with the mortgages. The remaining two cows are found, upon the testimony of parties to the mortgages, to have been encumbered. But the referee finds no connecting link between the two cows and the mortgages except the assertions of the witnesses.

These mortgages cannot be made effective against the plaintiff. The descriptions are not sufficient to give notice of an encumbrance. While a description need not be enough to enable one to find the property without inquiry, it must be such as to indicate the line of inquiry and furnish the basis of identification. The instrument must contain some designation which, when aided by further...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP