Brasfield v. W. C. Powell & Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Brasfield v. W. C. Powell & Co.

23 S.E. 106, 117 N.C. 140

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedSeptember 5, 1895

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 23 S.E. 106 (Brasfield v. W. C. Powell & Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Brasfield v. W. C. Powell & Co., 23 S.E. 106, 117 N.C. 140 (N.C. 1895).

Pincite

Opinion

Eurches, J.:

This case comes before us from a judgment upon a case agreed.

One Bailey, being indebted to plaintiff’s intestate, executed to him a mortgage on his crop, to be grown in 1894, which was duly probated and registered on the 15th day of January, 1894. Bailey, being indebted to defendants to the amount of $126.19, and desiring to obtain advances to the amount of $185 from defendants to enable him to make and gather his crop for 1894, executed to defendants an agricultural lien under the statute, upon his crop to be grown in 1894, to the amount of $185. And in the same instrument, a chattel mortgage on his crop and other property, to secure the $126.19 of other indebtedness, *141 which was duly probated and registered on the 17th day of January, 1894.

It has been held that an agricultural lien for advances,, properly registered under the statute, has priority over a-prior registered mortgage. Wooten v. Hill, 98 N. C., 48. This would give defendants a priority in the crop to the extent of $185, but for the following clause contained in the instrument to defendants, to-wit, “There is no incum-brance on said personal property, and none on said crop, except that I am to pay J. S. Brasfield out of crop $116' and interest on same from December 25th, 1893.”

Then there is alien on the crop to he paid out of the crop, and the defendants accept this conveyance with this provision in it. And when they did so, they accepted it as trustees and are bound to carry out the trust.

Bailey says to defendants, T will give you a mortgage on my stock and other articles of property, and I will also give you a lien on my crop. But I owe Brasfield $116, which is now a lien on the crop and is to be paid out of' the crop.’

This, in our opinion, is the same in effect as if Bailey had said, ‘Brasfield’s debt of $116 is first to be paid out of the crop and then your claim for advances.’ Hinton v. Leigh, 102 N. C., 28. Defendants admit they have a sufficient fund in hand, arising from a sale of the crop, to pay plaintiff, but not enough to pay both plaintiff and* defendants. There is no error.

No Error..

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

Eurches, J.:

This case comes before us from a judgment upon a case agreed.

One Bailey, being indebted to plaintiff’s intestate, executed to him a mortgage on his crop, to be grown in 1894, which was duly probated and registered on the 15th day of January, 1894. Bailey, being indebted to defendants to the amount of $126.19, and desiring to obtain advances to the amount of $185 from defendants to enable him to make and gather his crop for 1894, executed to defendants an agricultural lien under the statute, upon his crop to be grown in 1894, to the amount of $185. And in the same instrument, a chattel mortgage on his crop and other property, to secure the $126.19 of other indebtedness, *141 which was duly probated and registered on the 17th day of January, 1894.

It has been held that an agricultural lien for advances,, properly registered under the statute, has priority over a-prior registered mortgage. Wooten v. Hill, 98 N. C., 48. This would give defendants a priority in the crop to the extent of $185, but for the following clause contained in the instrument to defendants, to-wit, “There is no incum-brance on said personal property, and none on said crop, except that I am to pay J. S. Brasfield out of crop $116' and interest on same from December 25th, 1893.”

Then there is alien on the crop to he paid out of the crop, and the defendants accept this conveyance with this provision in it. And when they did so, they accepted it as trustees and are bound to carry out the trust.

Bailey says to defendants, T will give you a mortgage on my stock and other articles of property, and I will also give you a lien on my crop. But I owe Brasfield $116, which is now a lien on the crop and is to be paid out of' the crop.’

This, in our opinion, is the same in effect as if Bailey had said, ‘Brasfield’s debt of $116 is first to be paid out of the crop and then your claim for advances.’ Hinton v. Leigh, 102 N. C., 28. Defendants admit they have a sufficient fund in hand, arising from a sale of the crop, to pay plaintiff, but not enough to pay both plaintiff and* defendants. There is no error.

No Error..

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 S.E. 106, 117 N.C. 140, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brasfield-v-w-c-powell-co-nc-1895.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack