Enterprise Wall Paper Co. v. Rantoul Co.

103 A. 923, 260 Pa. 540, 1918 Pa. LEXIS 563
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided March 11, 1918·No. Appeal, No. 1·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam,

Until the paper manufactured by the Marley Mills Corporation under its contract of May 13,1916, with the appellant, the Enterprise Wall Paper Company, was actually delivered to that company, it was clearly liable to seizure by execution creditors of the corporation, for the law will not permit any device to elude the principle which forbids a lien to be created on chattels as a security separate from their possession: Jenkins v. Eichelberger, 4 Watts 121; Prichett et al. v. Cook, 62 Pa. 193. The judgment for the defendant in the feigned issue, having been properly entered non obstante veredicto, is affirmed.

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

Enterprise Wall Paper Co. v. Rantoul Co., 103 A. 923, 260 Pa. 540, 1918 Pa. LEXIS 563 (Pa. 1918).

103 A. 923 (Enterprise Wall Paper Co. v. Rantoul Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In Re Lincoln Industries, Inc.
166 F. Supp. 240 (W.D. Virginia, 1958)
Martin Jessee Motors, Inc. v. Reading Co.
87 F. Supp. 318 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1949)
Shipler v. New Castle Paper Products Corp.
143 A. 182 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1928)
Commonwealth v. One Cadillac Sedan
6 Pa. D. & C. 118 (Monroe County Court of Quarter Sessions, 1925)
Truck Tractor & Forwarding Co. v. Baker
126 A. 239 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1924)
Commonwealth v. Mathis
5 Pa. D. & C. 191 (Erie County Court of Quarter Sessions, 1924)