Reeves & Co. v. Bascue

• Decision Date: 05 July 1907
• Docket Number: 15,159
• Court: Kansas Supreme Court
• Parties: REEVES & CO. v. D. BASCUE

91 P. 77

76 Kan. 333

REEVES & CO. v. D. BASCUE

No. 15,159

Supreme Court of Kansas

July 5, 1907

Decided July, 1907.

Error from Crawford district court; ARTHUR FULLER, judge.

Judgment affirmed.

SYLLABUS

SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.

1. EXEMPTIONS--Traction-engine and Sawmill--Tools and Implements. A traction-engine and the saws, belts carrier, and other appliances commonly used in connection with such an engine for sawing logs and making lumber, are tools and implements within the meaning of subdivision 8 of section 3018. General Statutes of 1901, and are exempt to an owner who is a resident of the state and the head of a family, where they are necessary to, and are personally used by, him in carrying on the business of sawing logs and converting them into lumber.

2. CHATTEL MORTGAGES--Exempt Property--Signature of Wife Required. A mortgage given upon such appliances by the owner, without the consent or signature of his wife, is invalid.

Ryan & Phillips, for plaintiff in error.

T. J. Karr, for defendant in error.

OPINION

JOHNSTON, C. J.:

This was an action brought by Reeves & Co. to recover possession of a traction-engine and sawmill used in connection with it for the sawing of lumber. Bascue purchased a part of a thrashing outfit from plaintiff, and to secure payment of a portion of the purchase-price executed a chattel mortgage on the machinery in controversy. He failed to make one of the payments when it became due, and the plaintiff thereupon secured possession of the property under a writ of replevin.

The principal defense made by Bascue was that the chattel mortgage, under which the plaintiff claimed the right of possession, was void. The basis of this claim was that he was a married man, the head of a family; that the property was exempt; and that as his wife did not join him in the execution of the chattel mortgage it was void.

The trial resulted in a judgment in favor of the defendant for the possession of the property, or its value, placed at $ 650, and also for $ 357.50 as damages for the wrongful detention of the property.

The plaintiff complains, and contends that the engine and other appliances for sawing lumber constitute a manufacturing plant and cannot be classed as the necessary tools and implements of the defendant's business. His principal business, it appears, is sawing timber into lumber of various dimensions and forms. He did use the traction-engine in thrashing for a brief time during the thrashing season, but the sawing of lumber appears to have been his principal occupation. Aside from the traction-engine, which is portable, the saws, carrier, belts, etc., are said to be such as can be moved in a farmer's wagon. Were they exempt? The statute provides that there shall be exempt to a resident of the state who is the head of a family "the necessary tools and implements of any mechanic, miner, or other person, used and kept in stock for the purpose of carrying on his trade or business, and in addition thereto, stock in trade not exceeding four hundred dollars in value." (Gen. Stat. 1901, § 3018, subdiv. 8.)

It will be observed that the fact that the tools and implements are large and heavy does not take them out of the operation of the statute. Nor is there any limit placed on the number character or value of the tools and implements protected by the exemption. It is enough that they belong to the mechanic, miner or other person, that they are necessary, and are personally used for the...