Court Opinion

ID: 5209303
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-06 16:09:09.090422+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:27:20.569881
License: Public Domain

Houghton, J. (concurring):
I concur in the views expressed by Mr. Justice Clarke, and I think there is a further reason why the judgment should be affirmed.
The corporation took the property subject to the chattel mortgage given by Anderson, and took the assignment of the lease from her whereby it was agreed that the mortgage should be kept alive.
If the corporation chose to keep the property and the lease as it did, it was under obligation to keep the chattel mortgage alive as the lease provided. Being under such contractual obligation as a consideration of obtaining and holding title to the property and enjoying the lease, I do not think the statute as to consent of stockholders to giving a mortgage applied. The statute manifestly applies to creating a new incumbrance on corporate property, not to keeping alive one existing on property acquired subject to mortgage and under agreement to continue as a valid and subsisting lien.