Mcconnell v. the People
| Decision Date | 31 January 1874 |
| Citation | 1874 WL 8702,71 Ill. 481 |
| Parties | ANDREW B. MCCONNELL et al.v.THE PEOPLE, for the use of David P. Purvines. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
APPEAL from the Circuit Court of Sangamon county; the Hon. JOHN A. MCCLERNAND, Judge, presiding.
Messrs. ROBINSON, KNAPP & SHUTT, for the appellants.
Messrs. MORRISON & PATTEN, for the appellee.
September 16, 1872, Purvines executed a chattel mortgage to one John Champion, of a lot of horses, buggies and carriages, to secure the payment of a note for $750, given by the former to the latter, dated August 26, 1872, payable one year after date, with ten per cent interest. The property, by the terms of the mortgage, was to remain with the mortgagor until the maturity of the note, with the provision that, in case of default in payment, or of any danger or apprehension that the property might be taken in execution against the mortgagor, then the mortgagor should deliver up the property to the mortgagee, and that, on default of payment, or in case of any danger from execution as aforesaid, then the mortgagee, or his attorney, agent, or assigns, might take possession of the property, and sell the same at public sale to the highest bidder, for cash in hand, for the satisfaction of the debt, after giving at least ten days' notice of the sale, in the manner therein prescribed.
On the 28th of October, 1872, one of the appellants, McConnell, as sheriff of Sangamon county, levied upon said mortgaged property, by virtue of an execution which came into his hands October 19, 1872, from the circuit court of Sangamon county, in favor of one Cartwright, against Purvines, and on the same day, October 28, McConnell advertised the property for sale on the 8th of November, 1872. Before the sale by the sheriff, and on said 8th of November, Cartwright, the plaintiff in execution, purchased of Champion, the mortgagee, the note and chattel mortgage--the note not being indorsed to him until after the sale--and on that day, Cartwright directed the sheriff to sell the property to satisfy the mortgage debt, as well as the amount of the execution. On the 8th of November, McConnell sold the property under the execution, and also under the mortgage, as the agent of Cartwright. No other notice of the sale was given than the one given by the sheriff October 28, 1872. The sheriff's return to the execution is, that, by virtue of the execution, he sold the property for $1696.50, of which amount he had applied the sum of $765 to satisfy the mortgage, which was a prior lien to the execution. The execution was, besides, satisfied in full from the proceeds of the sale. This was an action against...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Harrill v. Weer
...29 Am. St. Rep. 913; Bourke v. Vanderlip's Executor et al., 22 Tex. 221; Marseilles Mfg. Co. v. Perry, 62 Neb. 715, 87 N.W. 544; McConnell v. People, 71 Ill. 481). See, also, Beebe v. DeBaun, 8 Ark. 510. If defendant was present at the sale, as alleged in the answer, and the averments there......
-
Mascall v. Murray
... ... 34; Gowan v. Jones, 10 S. & M ... 164; Smith v. Warden, 19 Pa. 424; Maple v ... Kussart, 53 Pa. 348, 91 Am. Dec. 214; McConnell v ... People, 71 Ill. 481; Spragg v. Shriver, 25 Pa ... 282, 64 Am. Dec. 698; Tooley v. Gridley, 3 Smedes & ... M. 493, 41 Am ... ...
-
Harrill v. Weer
...29 Am. St. Rep. 913; Bourke v. Vanderlip's Executor et al., 22 Tex. 222; Marseilles Mfg. Co. v. Perry, 62 Neb. 715, 87 N.W. 544; McConnell v. People, 71 Ill. 481). See, Beebe v. DeBaun, 8 Ark. 510. If defendant was present at the sale, as alleged in the answer, and the averments therein mus......
-
Bessesen v. Dorshkind
...and the sale is equivalent to a foreclosure in proper form.' See, also, Hill v. Finigan, 77 Cal. 267, 19 P. 494; McConnell v. People, to Use of Purvines, 71 Ill. 481. Appellant's third contention is that there is no evidence to support the findings of fact and conclusions of law upon which ......