Decatur Fertilizer Co. v. Decatur Motors

4 Citing cases

  1. ร†tna Auto Finance, Inc. v. Kirby

    198 So. 356 (Ala. 1940)   Cited 6 times
    In Aetna Auto Finance v. Kirby, 240 Ala. 228, 198 So. 356, a recorded judgment took precedence over an unrecorded conditional sales contract.

    Such attempted mortgage is void. 27 Cyc. 1041; Code, ยง 9026; Malone Motor Co. v. Green, 213 Ala. 635, 105 So. 897. If a judgment creditor whose debtor was at the time of the rendition of the judgment and prior thereto the vendee of personal property upon a conditional sale contract, failure to record said contract may mislead the judgment creditor to the belief that the property is standing open for seizure under execution upon his judgment. Chadwick v. Carson, 78 Ala. 116; Elliott v. Palmer, 9 Ala. App. 483, 64 So. 182; Decatur Fert. Co. v. Decatur Motors, 24 Ala. App. 32, 129 So. 709; Gen. Motors v. Eaton, 24 Ala. App. 533, 137 So. 780; Code, ยงยง 6898, 7874, 7485, 7878, 7879; Hall v. Griffin, 119 Ala. 214, 24 So. 27. BROWN, Justice.

  2. C. I. T. Corporation v. Stephens

    174 So. 493 (Ala. 1937)   Cited 2 times

    Contracts of conditional sale are, as to such condition, void as against judgment creditors without notice, unless in writing and recorded. Lynn v. Broyles Furniture Co., 3 Ala. App. 634, 57 So. 122; Pulaski Mule Co. v. Haley Koonce; 187 Ala. 533, 65 So. 783, Ann.Cas. 1916A, 877; Isbell-Hallmark Fur. Co. v. Sitz, 22 Ala. App. 229, 114 So. 675; Id., 217 Ala. 3, 114 So. 677; La Rue v. Loveman, Joseph Loeb, 220 Ala. 2, 127 So. 241; Decatur Fert. Co. v. Decatur Motors, 24 Ala. App. 32, 129 So. 709; Gen. Motors Acc. Corp. v. Eaton, 24 Ala. App. 533, 137 So. 780; Henley v. Bradshaw Mer. Co., 220 Ala. 193, 124 So. 426. Where the evidence is heard ore tenus by the court, without a jury, the court's finding will not be disturbed on appeal unless plainly contrary to the weight of the evidence. Woodrow v. Hawving, 105 Ala. 240, 16 So. 720; Simpson v. Golden, 114 Ala. 336, 21 So. 990; Thompson v. Collier, 170 Ala. 469, 54 So. 493; Finney v. Studebaker Corp., 196 Ala. 422, 72 So. 54; Palmer v. James, 210 Ala. 641, 99 So. 109; Smith v. Bugg, 211 Ala. 341, 100 So. 503.

  3. Scharnagel v. Quinn

    136 So. 834 (Ala. 1931)   Cited 5 times

    11 C. J. 648; Blackmon v. Engram, 214 Ala. 262, 107 So. 741; Bradford v. Proctor, 209 Ala. 299, 96 So. 203. The recording statute as to chattel mortgages does not apply to a judgment lien creditor of the mortgagor, if the judgment is based upon a debt made prior to the mortgage. Diamond Rubber Co. v. Fourth Nat. Bank, 171 Ala. 425, 55 So. 100; Birmingham News Co. v. Barron G. Collier, Inc., 212 Ala. 655, 103 So. 839; Decatur F. Co. v. Decatur M. Co. (Ala.App.) 129 So. 709. One who advances the purchase money to the buyer is entitled to the same preference over liens existing as the vendor himself. Western Tie Co. v. Campbell, 113 Ark. 570, 169 S.W. 253, Ann. Cas. 1916C, 943; Marin v. Knox, 117 Minn. 428, 136 N.W. 15, 40 L.R.A. (N.S.) 272; Boies v. Benham, 127 N.Y. 620, 28 N.E. 657, 14 L.R.A. 55. Execution of the mortgages by Lawler, payment to the Farm Bureau by petitioner for the fertilizer, and delivery of the fertilizer to Lawler, being contemporaneous, were one transaction.

  4. Lloyd's of London v. Fidelity Securities Corp.

    39 Ala. App. 596 (Ala. Crim. App. 1958)   Cited 9 times
    In Lloyd's of London v. Fidelity Securities Corporation, 39 Ala. App. 596, 105 So.2d 728, judgment was entered on February 8, 1957, and security for costs, which dated the appeal, was not filed with the circuit clerk until August 2, 1957.

    o general and will not be considered. Supreme Court Rule 1; Purvis v. Ennis, 258 Ala. 174, 61 So.2d 451. Assignments raising question of sufficiency of evidence will not be considered, no motion for new trial having been filed, calling attention of this to trial court. W. F. Main Co. v. Galloway, Ala., 39 So. 770; Wood v. Miller, 264 Ala. 370, 88 So.2d 560. Where no exception is reserved to ruling of trial court on admission of evidence such ruling cannot be considered on appeal. Crescent Amusement Co. v. Knight, 263 Ala. 445, 82 So.2d 919. Excessiveness of verdict must be raised by motion for new trial to warrant review on appeal. Central of Ga. R. Co. v. Chicago Varnish Co., 169 Ala. 287, 53 So. 832; 2 Ala.Dig., App. Error, 295. Lien of chattel mortgage recorded after certificate of judgment is recorded, and lien of prior unrecorded conditional sale contract, is subordinate to recorded judgment under Code, Tit. 7, ยง 584. Aetna Auto Finance Co. v. Kirby, 240 Ala. 228, 198 So. 356; Decatur Fertilizer Co. v. Decatur Motors, 24 Ala. App. 32, 129 So. 709. Purchaser at judicial sale is within protection of statute condemning unrecorded instruments. Chambers v. Hunton, 222 Ala. 482, 132 So. 713.