Fournier v. Wilson

31 A. 306, 19 R.I. 15, 1893 R.I. LEXIS 86
Supreme Court of Rhode Island·Decided March 8, 1893·Published·Cited by 14 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We are of the opinion that the first count in the declaration, to which the defendant has demurred, sufficiently states a cause of action. It sets forth the making and delivery of a certain note, and mortgage securing its payment, by one Isaac Fournier to the plaintiff, the record of the mortgage in the office of the town clerk of Lincoln, in which' town, as shown by the mortgage made a part of the count, the mortgagor resided at the making of the mortgage, the non-payment in full of the mortgage debt, the sale under execution against the mortgagor of the horse, a part of the mortgaged property, and the ref usal of the defendant who made the sale on demand by the plaintiff to pay to him the proceeds of the sale. Pub. Stat. E. I. cap. 2^8, § 6, provides that the proceeds of the sale of mortgaged personal estate under execution shall be applied to the payment of the amount due on the mortgage in the first instance, and the balance only to the payment of the amount due on the execution.

The count is sustained and the demurrer overruled. Case remitted to the Common Pleas Division for trial.

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

Fournier v. Wilson, 31 A. 306, 19 R.I. 15, 1893 R.I. LEXIS 86 (R.I. 1893).

31 A. 306 (Fournier v. Wilson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Massey-Ferguson, Inc. v. Talkington
401 P.2d 790 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1965)
United Rental Equipment Co. v. Potts & Callahan Contracting Co.
191 A.2d 570 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1963)
Cambridge Production Credit Ass'n v. Patrick
45 N.E.2d 751 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1942)
United States-Alaska Packing Co. v. Luketa
58 F.2d 944 (Ninth Circuit, 1932)
Eli Bridge Co. v. Dave Lachman
265 P. 435 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1928)
Van Ausdle Hoffman Piano Co. v. Jain
228 P. 342 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1924)
Hackney v. Birely
215 P. 642 (Montana Supreme Court, 1923)
Stern v. Drew
285 F. 925 (D.C. Circuit, 1922)
Horton v. Wright, Barrett, & Stillwell Co.
162 N.W. 939 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1917)
Mergenthaler Linotype Co. v. Hull
239 F. 26 (First Circuit, 1916)
Springfield Fire & Marine Insurance v. Chandler
41 App. D.C. 209 (D.C. Circuit, 1913)
Worley v. Metropolitan Motor Car Co.
130 P. 107 (Washington Supreme Court, 1913)
Gaertner v. Western Elevator Co.
116 N.W. 945 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1908)