Blevins v. W.A. Graham Co.

• Decision Date: 13 May 1919
• Docket Number: 8164.
• Citation: 182 P. 247,72 Okla. 308,1919 OK 147
• Parties: BLEVINS et al. v. W. A. GRAHAM CO.
• Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court

182 P. 247

72 Okla. 308, 1919 OK 147

BLEVINS et al. v. W. A. GRAHAM CO.

No. 8164.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

May 13, 1919

Syllabus by the Court.

In a suit for conversion by a mortgagee whose mortgage was prior as to date, but was not witnessed or acknowledged, but filed in the office of the county clerk, against a mortgagee who sold the property covered by the mortgages and applied the proceeds of the sale upon the debt secured by his mortgage and where the holder of such junior mortgage saw and read the senior mortgage in the office of the county clerk, but pursued his investigations no further, but deemed said senior mortgage void for want of subscribing witnesses or proper acknowledgment before some officer authorized to take acknowledgments, and proceeded to take his mortgage and have the same properly executed and filed for record, and, when default was made by the mortgagor, sold the property and applied the proceeds as aforesaid, evidence held to make questions for the jury as to whether the holder of the junior mortgage was not put upon inquiry and would not have learned of the prior mortgagee's lien by investigation and the trial court erred in instructing a verdict.

Comp Laws Okl. 1909, § 4422, provided that a mortgage of personal property was void as against creditors and subsequent purchasers and incumbrancers in good faith for value, unless the original or an authenticated copy was filed as therein required. Rev. Laws Okl. 1910, § 4031, contains a similar provision, except that the words "in good faith" are omitted; but a further provision of such section relating to mortgages on property in an unorganized county, makes such mortgages void against subsequent purchasers or incumbrancers in good faith for value, unless filed. Section 4035 provides that a chattel mortgage shall cease to be valid as against subsequent purchasers or incumbrancers in good faith after the expiration of three years, unless a renewal certificate is filed. Held, that the Legislature did not intend to make an unfiled mortgage invalid as against a purchaser for value; but, having notice of the mortgage, used the words "purchasers, and incumbrancers *** for value" in the first part of the section in the same sense as the words "purchaser, or incumbrancers *** in good faith for value" in the last part of the section.

To ascertain the intention of the Legislature in the enactment of the statute, the court may look to each part of the statute, to other statutes upon the same or relative subjects, to the evils and mischiefs to be remedied, and to the natural or absurd consequences of any particular interpretation.

Error from County Court, Mays County; H. A. Kehn, Judge.

Action in conversion by George Blevins and another against the W. A. Graham Company. Judgment for defendant on a directed verdict, and plaintiffs bring error. Reversed and remanded, with directions.

A. C. Brewster and Forrester Brewster, both of Pryor, for plaintiffs in error.

J. H. Langley, of Pryor, for defendant in error.

JOHNSON J.

This was an action in conversion brought in the county court of Mayes county, Okl., by George Blevins and E. N. Jackson, plaintiffs in error, against W. A. Graham Company, a corporation, defendant in error. Judgment was for the defendant. The trial court, after hearing the cause, directed the jury to return a verdict for the defendant. To this ruling the plaintiff duly excepted, and brings error, setting up five assignments of error, only one of which it is necessary to comment upon here, as the other assignments of error can all be disposed of by disposing of this one. Did the court err in peremptorily instructing the jury to return a verdict in favor of the defendant?

The parties practically agree upon the evidence, and the case depends upon the construction of sections 4031 and 4036, Revised Laws 1910, relating to Chattel Mortgages.

The record discloses the following facts: On April 16, 1915, one Mayes Johnson executed to the plaintiffs his chattel mortgage, covering a certain horse, as security therefor. The chattel mortgage was neither acknowledged by a proper officer nor subscribed by any witnesses. It was deposited with the county clerk (ex officio register of deeds) on April 21, 1915, and marked "Filed."

On May 15, 1915, the same Mayes Johnson and Emma Johnson, his wife, executed to defendant their promissory note for $700, together with their chattel mortgage on personal property to secure the same, which personal property included the same horse covered by plaintiff's mortgage. The defendant's mortgage was duly acknowledged by a proper officer and duly filed for record May 15, 1915. One C. H. Graham, secretary and treasurer of the defendant corporation, who acted as the representative of the corporation in the securing of defendant's mortgage, searched the records of the office of the county clerk, prior to the taking of defendant's mortgage, and saw the plaintiff's mortgage and read it. About June 15, 1915, the defendant took possession of the horse on account of default in the payment of its note, and sold it, applying the proceeds to the $700 note. The plaintiff brought an action for damages in conversion with the result as above stated.

The claim is made on behalf of the defendant that the statutes of Oklahoma invalidate plaintiff's mortgage as to them, because neither the original mortgage nor a copy thereof authenticated by the register of deeds was filed for record. For many years the statute of Oklahoma relating to this subject read as follows:

"A mortgage of personal property is void as against creditors of the mortgagor, and subsequent purchasers, and incumbrancers of the property in good faith, for value, unless the original or an authenticated copy thereof, be filed by depositing the same in the office of the register of deeds of the county where the property mortgaged, or any part thereof, is at such time situated." Section 4422, Snyder's Comp. Laws Okl. 1909.

See Strahorn-Hutton-Evans Commission Co. v. Florer, 7 Okl. 499, 54 P. 710.

In 1911 the Legislature of Oklahoma adopted the revision of the state statutes made by code commissioners known as the Revised Laws of Oklahoma, and the corresponding provision is found as a part of section 4031, but the words "in good faith" are omitted. It is contended that this change of the statute renders void the plaintiff's mortgage, because the defendants were subsequent incumbrancers for value. The statute in question is a portion of a chapter relating to the execution, recording, and effect of mortgages upon real and personal property. Other sections of the chapter retain the exception of actual notice as equivalent to a sufficient notice by record. Sections 4031, 4035, Revised Laws Okl. 1910.

In order to ascertain the intention of the Legislature in the enactment of section 4031, the court may look to each part of the...