Strop v. Hughes

• Decision Date: 04 February 1907
• Citation: 101 S.W. 149,123 Mo. App. 544
• Parties: STROP v. HUGHES.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

101 S.W. 149

123 Mo. A. 544

STROP v. HUGHES.

Kansas City Court of Appeals. Missouri.

February 4, 1907.

Rehearing Denied April 10, 1907.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Cass County; Nick M. Bradley, Judge.

Replevin by Charles Strop against Thomas R. Hughes. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals. Reversed and remanded.

Whitsitt & Jarrott, for appellant. Jas. M. Houston, for respondent.

BROADDUS, J.

The same question arises in this case as is determined in Strop v. Hughes (No. 7,796) 101 S. W. 146. It is, however, strenuously insisted herein that there was no evidence identifying the property in suit, as that described in the mortgage. But we think there is. And our opinion is strengthened by what we find in defendant's statement of the case, viz.: "That chattels in question were at the time of the execution of said pretended mortgage, June 29, 1903, in the possession of the Humphrey Hereford Cattle Company, on its ranch about four miles southeast of Belton in Cass county, Mo., where they remained continuously in the possession of the Humphrey Hereford Cattle Company until they were seized by respondent under writ and execution directed against the Humphrey Hereford Cattle Company." The mortgage includes all the property of said company on the premises of the company; therefore, if the property described was included in the mortgage and remained in the possession of the company until seized by the respondent under his writ of attachment, it seems that it was sufficiently identified, as it is admitted that the same property was taken under plaintiff's writ of replevin.

Reversed and remanded. All concur.