Fuller v. Byrne

60 N.W. 980, 102 Mich. 461, 1894 Mich. LEXIS 1058
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedNovember 20, 1894
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 60 N.W. 980 (Fuller v. Byrne) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Fuller v. Byrne, 60 N.W. 980, 102 Mich. 461, 1894 Mich. LEXIS 1058 (Mich. 1894).

Opinion

Long, J.

Defendant is sheriff of Gogebic county, and levied an execution upon, and took into his possession,' a piano which he found in the possession of Carl Marquardt. The execution was against Marquardt, and the sheriff levied upon the property as belonging to him. The plaintiffs in this suit are piano dealers, and had delivered the piano in question to Marquardt under a conditional contract of sale, which contained the following stipulation:

“The said instrument is and shall remain the property of said Estey & Camp until each and every of said amounts, and interest thereon, and any judgment rendered thereon, is'paid in full.”

This action is replevin brought by plaintiffs against Byrne, and the property was taken under the writ. On the trial it appeared that the plaintiffs, before the sheriff levied his execution, had brought suit against Marquardt, [462]*462and obtained personal judgment for the amount due on the contract. It was therefore contended that plaintiffs had relinquished their claim. The court below directed judgment in favor of plaintiffs for six cents damages and costs of suit.

The court below was correct in so finding. The plaintiffs and Marquardt had entered into a contract by which the title .to the property was to remain in the vendors until the “amounts, and interest thereon, and any judgment rendered thereon, is paid in full.” Under this contract the vendors had the right to obtain judgment against the vendee for the amount due, and interest thereon, and the title was not to pass until such ju.dgmen-t was paid. There is no intention shown here to release the lien or pass the title. The mere fact of personal judgment was not, under the contract, to release the lien or pass title, until judgment paid.. See Kirkwood v. Hoxie, 95 Mich. 66, and cases there cited.

Judgment is affirmed.

The other Justices concurred.

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

Related

Bolinger v. National Cash Register Co.
3 N.E.2d 640 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1936)
In re National Cash Register Co.
283 F. 742 (Sixth Circuit, 1922)
Young v. Phillips
169 N.W. 822 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1918)
In re Sutton
244 F. 872 (E.D. Michigan, 1917)
Atkinson v. Japink
152 N.W. 1079 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1915)
Perkins v. Golden Girl
151 N.W. 660 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1915)
Taylor v. Applebaum
118 N.W. 492 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1908)
Bunday v. Columbus Machine Co.
106 N.W. 397 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1906)
Kilmer v. Moneyweight Scale Co.
76 N.E. 271 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1905)
Canadian Typograph Co. v. Macgurn
78 N.W. 542 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1899)
Pettyplace v. Groton Bridge & Manufacturing Co.
61 N.W. 266 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1894)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
60 N.W. 980, 102 Mich. 461, 1894 Mich. LEXIS 1058, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fuller-v-byrne-mich-1894.