B. M. Burgher Co. v. Barry

Court of Appeals of Texas

B. M. Burgher Co. v. Barry

211 S.W. 457, 1919 Tex. App. LEXIS 536

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedApril 10, 1919

DocketNo. 2108.

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 211 S.W. 457 (B. M. Burgher Co. v. Barry) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

B. M. Burgher Co. v. Barry, 211 S.W. 457, 1919 Tex. App. LEXIS 536 (Tex. Ct. App. 1919).

Pincite

Opinion

LEVY, J.

(after stating the facts as above).

The only question for decision on appeal is as to the priority of liens. According to the findings of fact, Grossman Company had a chattel mortgage lien on the property which was executed by Joseph Shahada on October 16, 1914; and the rental contract between defendant in error Childress and Joseph Sha-hada originated and began on December 3, 1914. At the time of the rental contract of December 3, 1914, the defendant in error Childress had been paid in full all rent due him to that date. In these facts it is believed that the chattel mortgage lien is superior to and has priority over any lien in this case of the landlord Childress. Brackenridge v. Millan, 81 Tex. 17, 16 S. W. 555.

The judgment on the cross-action is reversed, and judgment is here entered in favor of the plaintiffs in error, with all costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

LEVY, J.

(after stating the facts as above).

The only question for decision on appeal is as to the priority of liens. According to the findings of fact, Grossman Company had a chattel mortgage lien on the property which was executed by Joseph Shahada on October 16, 1914; and the rental contract between defendant in error Childress and Joseph Sha-hada originated and began on December 3, 1914. At the time of the rental contract of December 3, 1914, the defendant in error Childress had been paid in full all rent due him to that date. In these facts it is believed that the chattel mortgage lien is superior to and has priority over any lien in this case of the landlord Childress. Brackenridge v. Millan, 81 Tex. 17, 16 S. W. 555.

The judgment on the cross-action is reversed, and judgment is here entered in favor of the plaintiffs in error, with all costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

211 S.W. 457, 1919 Tex. App. LEXIS 536, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/b-m-burgher-co-v-barry-texapp-1919.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack