Case Name: American Well Works v. Whinery et al.
Court: Iowa Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Iowa
Decision Date: 1888-12-22
Citations: 76 Iowa 400
Docket Number: 
Parties: American Well Works v. Whinery et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Iowa Reports
Volume: 76
Pages: 400–401

Head Matter:
American Well Works v. Whinery et al.
Chattel Mortgage: insufficient description : attaching creditors with actual notice. Although a recorded chattel mortgage may be insufficient to impart constructive notice, on account of the defective description of the property, it is still good as against subsequent attaching creditors who had actual notice of it when the attachment was made. ( Clapp v. Trowbridge, 74 Iowa, 550, and Plano Manuf. Co. v. Griffith, 75 Iowa, 102, followed.)
Appeal from Hardin District Court. — Hon. S. M. Weaver, Judge.
Filed, December 22, 1888.
The plaintiff commenced an action in attachment against the defendant Whinery. Certain personal property was attached. The defendants Chapin & Lundy intervened in the action, and claimed the property under chattel mortgages made by Whinery to them. There were demurrers to the petitions- of intervention, which demurrers were sustained, and the intervenors appeal.
Ii. L. Huff, for appellants.
AlbrooTc & Hardin, for appellee.

Opinion:
Rothrock, J.
— The demurrers are upon the ground that the description of the property in the chattel mortgages is so indefinite as that the instruments are void for uncertainty, and impart no notice to any one. It is, however, averred in the petitions of intervention that the attaching plaintiffs, at the time they caused the chattels to^be attached, had actual notice that the identical property attached was covered by the chattel mortgages, and that the intervenors had a lien thereon. It is conceded in argument by appellant that the mortgages did not impart constructive notice to the plaintiffs. The question to be determined is whether itis competent to allege and prove that the plaintiffs had actual notice. This precise question was determined by this court in the case of Plano Manuf. Co. v. Griffith, 75 Iowa, 102. It was there held that where an execution creditor had actual notice of a mortgage upon property, it was not void as to him upon the ground that the description of the property in the mortgage was insufficient for the purpose of constructive notice. See also Clapp v. Trowbridge, 74 Iowa, 550. It is due to the learned district judge, who determined this case, to say that the opinions in the above cited cases were filed since the ruling upon the demurrer in the case at bar.
Reversed.