Court Opinion

ID: 9865262
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-25 16:29:28.609255+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:38:13.850543
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice Denison,
dissenting.
I cannot concur in the matter of the validity of the chattel mortgages. It seems to me that the decision overturns a rule settled by a line of authorities covering fifty years. City Nat. Bank v. Goodrich, 3 Colo. 139; Wilcox v. Jackson, 7 Colo. 521, 4 P. 966; Wilson v. Voight, 9 Colo. 614, 13 P. 726; Brasher v. Christophe, 10 Colo. 284, 15 P. 403; Hall v. Johnson, 21 Colo. 414, 42 P. 660; Wellington v. Terry, 38 Colo. 285, 88 P. 467; First Nat. Bank of Ft. Collins v. Shafer, 64 Colo. 388, 172 P. 1, L. R. A. 1918E, 636; Harbison v. Tufts, 1 Colo. App. 140, 143, 27 P. 1014; Roberts v. Johnson, 5 Colo. App. 406, 39 P. 596; Wile v. Butler, 4 Colo. App. 154, 34 P. 1110; Edinger v. Grace, 8 Colo. App. 21, 44 P. 855; Lee v. Stanard, 15 Colo. App. 101, 61 P. 234; Estes v. First Nat. Bank, 15 Colo. App. 526, 63 P. 788; Wilson v. Jones, 20 Colo. App. 317, 78 P. 622; Lodge v. Norlin (C. C. A.) 133 F. 363. Let any one interested read Wilson v. Voight, 9 Colo. 614, 13 P. 726.
*204It is said that Brug v. Herbst, 78 Colo. 128, 130, 239 Pac. 868, and Bogdon v. Fort, 75 Colo. 231, 235, 225 Pac. 247, have overruled the above eases. My understanding of those cases was and is that they refer only to mortgages on sugar beets and other crops, if any, disposed of in like manner and are based on the theory that mortgages on such are made subject to the custom under which such crops are marketed. This opinion seems to put mortgages on ordinary chattels under the same rule. If it is not intended so to do the opinion should be made clear, if it is so intended, I dissent.