Meier v. Nw. Thresher Co.

Decision Date01 November 1912
CourtMinnesota Supreme Court
PartiesMEIER v. NORTHWEST THRESHER CO.

119 Minn. 289
138 N.W. 36

MEIER
v.
NORTHWEST THRESHER CO.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

Nov. 1, 1912.


Appeal from District Court, Waseca County; Arthur B. Childress, Judge.

Action by Fred Meier against the Northwest Thresher Company. From an order denying a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or for a new trial, plaintiff appeals. Reversed, and new trial granted.


Syllabus by the Court

A provision of a mortgage, executed to secure the purchase price of threshing machinery, that the gross earnings of the machinery should be paid to the mortgagee, free from operation liens, but that 40 per cent. of the earnings so received by the mortgagee should by it be paid to the mortgagor for operation expenses, construed, and held to give the mortgagor an immediate and absolute right to 40 per cent. of the proceeds, less expense of collection, of certain threshing accounts assigned by him, pursuant to the terms of the mortgage, to the mortgagee, and by it collected.

Transaction in which the said claims were assigned to the mortgagee considered, and held to import a direction from the mortgagor to the mortgagee to pay certain debts due, at the time of such assignment, from the mortgagor to the plaintiff and his assignors for labor performed in connection with the operation of the said machinery, so that the plaintiff had the right to recover from the mortgagee that proportion of the proceeds of the assigned accounts which, by the terms of the mortgage, belonged to the mortgagor for operating expenses.


[138 N.W. 37]

Moonan & Moonan, of Waseca, for appellant.

P. McGovern, of Waseca, and S. B. McBeath, of Stillwater, for respondent.


PHILIP E. BROWN, J.

Action to recover $113.50, with interest, for labor performed by the plaintiff and others, whose claims have been assigned to him, in the operation of threshing machinery owned and operated by one Lawrence Walter. On the trial of the cause to a jury, both parties having moved for a verdict, by the court's direction the jury returned a verdict for the defendant. This is an appeal by the plaintiff from an order denying his alternative motion for judgment or for a new trial.

It appears that in the year 1906 the said Walter, in order to secure the payment of a part of the purchase price, namely, $2,583.75, of a threshing rig bought by him from the defendant, executed to the latter a chattel mortgage thereon, and for further security all of the gross earnings of the machinery during the years 1906, 1907, and 1908, and until the...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT