State ex rel. Blake v. Cabanne

• Decision Date: 06 November 1883
• Citation: 14 Mo.App. 294
• Parties: STATE OF MISSOURI, EX REL. CHARLES J. BLAKE, Respondent, v. S. C. CABANNE ET AL., Appellants.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

14 Mo.App. 294

STATE OF MISSOURI, EX REL. CHARLES J. BLAKE, Respondent,

v.S. C. CABANNE ET AL., Appellants.

St. Louis Court of Appeals, Missouri.

Nov. 6, 1883.

APPEAL from the St. Louis Circuit Court, LUBKE, J.

Affirmed.

R. W. GOODE and M. W. HUFF, for the appellants.

L. J. SMITH, for the respondent.

THOMPSON, J., delivered the opinion of the court.

This is an action on an indemnifying bond given in an attachment suit before a justice of the peace. The relator claimed the property as the assignee of a chattel mortgage. The mortgage, when offered in evidence, was objected to on the ground that it did not contain a sufficient description of the property to impart notice to a subsequent creditor under the statute relating to mortgages of personal property. Rev. Stats., sect. 2503. The court overruled this objection and the propriety of this ruling is the only question in the case.

The property is described in the mortgage as follows: “The following goods and chattels now situated and being at No. 1009 Chestnut Street, St. Louis, Missouri, namely: four bed-room sets of furniture, four mirrors, four chamber sets, all the kitchen utensils, such as stove, stoveware, tinware, ironware and kitchen furniture, such as tables, chairs, etc., thirteen pictures, one hundred and seventy-five yards of carpeting, one full set of dishes, knives, forks, cups, saucers and all of the remaining tableware whatsoever, three lounges, lace curtains, window shades, rugs, mats, bedding, mattresses, sheets, pillows and covers to beds as above named, together with all and every other piece of personal property or household furniture or furnishing situated at the above named house.” The property as described in the indemnifying bond which conforms without substantial variance to the description in the levy and in the claim was as follows:--

“One full M. P. French dresser chamber set, one wardrobe (glass door), 2 pair lace curtains, 9 pictures, 1 brown rep parlor suit, 7 pieces, 1 mattress, 1 pair springs, 1 bolster, 2 pillows, 2 comforts, 1 large round top marble table, 1 small round top marble table, 1 mirror, 1 large hall-tree, of the value of one hundred and thirty-one 50/100 dollars.” It will be perceived that when this mortgage was given, the property was situated in the house 1009 Chestnut Street, St. Louis. But when the levy was made, the mortgageor, Lilly Williams, had removed from that place to No. 105 North Tenth Street. The designation in the mortgage of the house in which...