The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1900-01-10
IS MORTGAGE VO|D?
Containing Exempt and Unex-
emptPropertyofMarried Man
CASE IN APPELLATE COURT
Which Is Being Holly Contest
ed by Winfield Lawyers.

bench 1t will be three days session.
An interesting case, involving the val
idity of chattel mortgage on both exempt
and non-exempt property, which mortgage
was not consented to by the wife, is that
of the First National Bank of Winfield
against J. w. Skinner, sheriff of Cowley
county. 1t seems from the statements
filed that on the 23rd day of May, 1894.
Daniel Edey, defendant in error, obtain
ed judgment against Justin HOLSTER for
$3.50 and costs on a labor debt Upon this
judgment an execution was levied on
certain property of HOLSTERS which was
sold by Sheriff Skinner for S183. There
after Justin HOLSTER had made to the
First National Bank of Winfield his chat
tel mortgage to secure a, promissory note
of $1,000. AT the time this chattel mort
gage was made, and thereafter, Justin
HOLSTER was a married man and the
head of a family, and the wife of Mr.
HOLSTER did not execute this chattel
mortgage with her husband. The mort
gage was to include all personal prop
erty on the farm.
This action in replevin was brought by
the bank against Sheriff Skinner to re-
cover the ownership of certain horses in
which the bank claimed to have special
ownership by virtue of said mortgage.
In the trial Of the case the court in
structed the jury that the sole question
for their determination was the value of
the property and ordered them to return
a verdict for the plaintiff below.
In their specifications of errors the at
torneys for the sheriff claim that the
trial court erred in refusing to instruct
the jury that a chattel mortgage, such
as the bank had, containing exempt per-
sonal property, was void unless signed
by HOLSTERS wife, and the Judgment Of
Daniel Edey sought to be enforced byt the
execution under which the sheriff in this
case justified being rendered for labor
debt.
The plaintiff in error in the arguments
submitted to the appellate court yester-
day, claims that the attempt of Justin
HOLSTER, a married man, to mortgage all
his personal property, exempt and nom
exempt, in one chatteI mortgage which
the wife did not execute. and without her
joint consent, was the doing of an IN
lawful act, and thus rendered the banks
chattel mortgage void
The case was argued at length by
Judge ]. C. Pollock for the plaintiff in
error and Mr. Buckman of the firm of
Madden & Buckman, for the defendants
in error The case was submitted on the
briefs filed with the court.
The following decisions were rendered
with reference to cases in this division
on which were petitions submitted to
certify to the supreme court:
Westchester Fire Insurance company
VS.. Coverdale, error from Sumner coun-
ty; allowed.
]. E Russell VS.. Board of County Com
missioners of Greenwood county, petition
for order to certify to supreme court; de-
MED
The First National Bank of Arkansas
City VS.. Henrietta Ames, error from
Cowley county; petition to certify to
supreme court denied.
Blackwelder VS. Rock Island Lumber
company. error from Sumner county; pc
tition to order certified TO supreme court
denied.
Rachel H Congdon, ADMINISTRATIVE VS..
S. ]. Bryan, error from Harey county;
petition to order certified to supreme
court denied.
The Anthony Investment company vs..
Leroy Law ct al, error from Harper
county; petition to order certified to su-
preme court allowed.
Other docket cases were disposed of as
follows:
w L. Woodruff VS. Joseph B. Dane ct
al, error from Reno county; dismissed
for failure to file briefs.
S. w. Shattuck VS.. Chas. A. Adamson
ct al, error from Sedgwick county; con-
tinued to May term, as per stipulation.
Franklin B. Snow VS.. National Bank of
Commerce, appealed from Reno county;
dismissed on motion of the plaintiff in
error.
John T. Stewart VS.. James Maxley.
error from Sumner county; dismissed at
cost of plaintiff in eriNr.
The Fleming & Ayrst company VS.. ].
r Evans ct al, error from Lyon coun-
ty. submitted on briefs.
J. NJ. Freidburg VS.. E. H. Mudd, error
from Sedgwick county; submitted on
briefs.
D. NJ. Osborne & Co VS.. Peter Gitz-
hotter. error from Sedgw:ck county; sub
mitted on briefs.
W. H. H. Badger vs. Josiah Sample,
error from Greenwood county; submitted
on briefs.
Lille Gardner. Administrative. VS.. r. H
Cooper. error from Butler county; passed
to Thursday.
The Wellington National Bank VS.. John
Straub Sr, ct al. error from Sumner
county; submitted on briefs.
The Lehman-Higginson Grocery com
pany VS.. John Straub ST.. ct al, error
from Sumner county; submitted on
briefs
The Wichita Wholesale Grocery COM
pany vs.. John straub. sr-. ct al. error
from Sumner county; submitted on
briefs.
The Lehman-Higginson Grocery COM
pany vs. James McLsin. constable. error
from Cowley county; submitted on briefs.
VIM. June ct al. VS.. Geo. ". Ogg. as
signee. error from CowIey county; dis
missed for failure 20 file briefs.
The following motions were submitted
and disposed Of:
Melville 3. Lewis e. al vs.. wm- J.
Menzies. et al. error from Cowley county.
Motion 10 reinstste allowed a; Fort Scott
and ordered TO De placed on May docket
for trial
Rock Island Railway company vs.. W.
A ATiniok; error from Sedgwick county.
Motion BY defendant In error 70 dismiss
argued by Joseph Brubacher for the de-
PENDANT IN error. and P r. VermiIliOn
for plaintiff. and submitted on briefs.
USES A M6GAPH0NE
Evangelist Mauning's Way of Enter