Case Name: Rountree v. Chrisman & Company
Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia
Jurisdiction: Georgia
Decision Date: 1917-09-13
Citations: 20 Ga. App. 815
Docket Number: 8812
Parties: Rountree v. Chrisman & Company.
Judges: George and Luke, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Georgia Appeals Reports
Volume: 20
Pages: 815–816

Head Matter:
8812.
Rountree v. Chrisman & Company.

Opinion:
Wade, C. J.'
The property levied upon was described in the mortgage fi. fa. as "one yellow mare mule 6 years old, about 15 hands high," and the mortgage upon which this fi. fa. was based covered property described as "one yellow mare 6 year old, about 15 hand high," but the mortgage recited, immediately following these words of description, that "it is expressly agreed that said J. N. Chrisman & Company do not warrant health, life, soundness, and work of said mule [italics ours], only tlie title thereto, and which the said J. A. Moree hereby mortgages to the said.J. N. Chrisman & Company, to secure the pur-, chase price aforesaid." The mortgagor sold the mortgaged property to a person who in turn sold it to the plaintiff in error, and the latter interposed a claim to it when it was levied upon under the mortgage fi. fa. as "one yellow mare mule, . . the property of J. A. Moree, by virtue of a mortgage fi. fa.," etc. Held, that the mortgage, when considered as a whole, indicated the existence of a contract lien upon a yellow mare mule sufficiently to place all third persons upon constructive notice thereof; and the trial judge (there being no conflict in the evidence) , did not err in directing a verdict in favor of the plaintiff in fi. fa., finding the property subject to the mortgage execution.
Decided September 13, 1917.
Levy and claim; from city court of Nashville—Judge Christian. February 13, 1917.
J. Z. Jackson, for plaintiff in error.
Hendricks, Mills & Hendricks, contra.
Judgment affirmed.
George and Luke, JJ., concur.