Martin v. Jenkins
| Decision Date | 20 October 1897 |
| Citation | 51 S.C. 42,27 S.E. 947 |
| Parties | MARTIN v. JENKINS et al. |
| Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
Chattel Mortgages—Breach of Condition—Effect—Foreclosure—Remedy of Second Mortgagee.
1. After breach of the conditions of a chattel mortgage, the legal title to the property becomes vested in the mortgagee, subject to the right of the mortgagor to redeem before sale, or to compel an accounting in equity, after sale, for the surplus over the debt.
2. A purchaser of mortgaged chattels, after breach of the condition of the mortgage, from the mortgagee, or from the mortgagor with the consent of the mortgagee, acquires the legal title and right of possession.
3. After breach of the conditions of a chattel mortgage executed subsequent to breach of the conditions of a first mortgage, the second mortgagee cannot recover possession of the property from the mortgagor; his only remedy being redemption under the first mortgage, or an accounting.
Appeal from common pleas circuit court of Fairfield county; O. W. Buchanan, Judge.
Action by William T. Martin against Harry Jenkins and Rufus Robinson. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal. Reversed.
J. E. McDonald, for appellants.
Ragsdale & Ragsdale, for respondent.
This action was begun in a magistrate's court for the recovery of the possession of a mare in the possession of defendant Robinson, and of a mule in the possession of defendant Jenkins, and this appeal is from the judgment of the circuit court affirming the judgment of the magistrate's court in favor of the plaintiff. The plaintiff claimed under a mortgage of said chattels executed by defendant Jenkins to him, January 12, 1S93, for $139.-35, payable October 1, 1893, which was unsatisfied. Previous to this, however, on December 30, 1891, Jenkins gave a mortgage on the same property for $67.52, payable October 1, 1892, to J. T. Martin & Co., who, for value, assigned the same to McMaster, Brice & Ketch-en. Upon this mortgage a payment of $36.14 had been made, leaving a balance due. In March, 1896, the mortgagor, Jenkins, under instructions from McMaster, Brice & Ketchen, sold the mare to defendant Robinson for its full value, $25, which Jenkins received, but did not apply to the mortgage. Both mort-gages were duly recorded. At the time of the sale to Robinson, Jenkins was living on, and working lands of, McMaster, Brice & Ketchen. At the time of his purchase of the mare, Robinson had actual notice of the mortgage of McMaster, Brice & Ketchen, and also of the instruction given to Jenkins to dispose of the mare.
After breach of the condition of a mortgage of personal property, the legal title to the property mortgaged becomes vested In the mortgagee, subject only to the right of the mortgagor to redeem before sale, or, after sale, to an accounting in equity for the surplus, if any, over the debt secured by the mortgage. Reese v. Lyon, 20 S. C. 20; McClendon v. Wells, 20 S. C. 514; Williams v. Dobson, 26 S. C. 110, 1 S. E. 421; Ex parte Knobeloch, 26 S. C. 336, 2 S. E. 612; Ex parte Lorenz, 32 S. C. 368, 11 S. E. 206; Wylie v. Railroad Co., 48 S. C. 405, 26 S. E. 676. In this case the condition of the mortgage of McMaster, Brice & Ketchen had been broken previous to the execution of plaintiff's mortgage. At the time plaintiff took his mortgage, therefore, the absolute title...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Stewart v. Smith
...none as to the proposition that upon condition broken both the right of possession and the title unite in the mortgagee. Martin v. Jenkins, 51 S. C. 42, 27 S. E. 947; Rainwater v. Bank, 108 S. C. 206, 93 S. E. 770; Greene v. Washington, 105 S. C. 137, 89 S. E. 649; Bank v. Brigiman, 106 S. ......
-
Mauldin v. Milford
... ... the buyer takes the title free from the lien of the mortgage ... is well settled. 11 C.J. 624; Martin v. Jenkins, 51 ... S.C. 42, 27 S.E. 947; Flenniken v. Scruggs, 15 S.C ... 88. If such buyer resells and is sued for breach of warranty ... of ... ...
-
Atlas Finance Co. v Credit Co.
...of the mortgaged property, he waives his lien of the mortgage.' See 11 C.J. 624; 14 C.J.S., Chattel Mortgages, § 262, also Martin v. Jenkins, 51 S.C. 42, 27 S.E. 947; Flenniken v. Scruggs, 15 S.C. 88; Mauldin Milford, 127 S.C. 508, 121 S.E. 547; General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. Hanahan, 1......
-
Chrysler Credit Corp. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 19876
...by Davis and the return of the vehicle to the dealer. Appellant contended that, under South Carolina law as set forth in Martin v. Jenkins, 51 S.C. 42, 27 S.E. 947 and Dickerson v. Cleland, 120 S.C. 221, 112 S.E. 920, the failure of Davis to make the installment payments due under the insta......