Sherman v. Texas Hotel Supply Co.

Court of Appeals of Texas

Sherman v. Texas Hotel Supply Co.

66 S.W.2d 1094, 1933 Tex. App. LEXIS 1711

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedDecember 6, 1933

DocketNo. 9179.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 66 S.W.2d 1094 (Sherman v. Texas Hotel Supply Co.) 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

Sherman v. Texas Hotel Supply Co., 66 S.W.2d 1094, 1933 Tex. App. LEXIS 1711 (Tex. Ct. App. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

SMITH, Justice.

The appeal involves the question of the priority of a landlord’s lien asserted by appellant over a chattel mortgage lien asserted by appellee, upon certain supplies purchased.from appellee by the A. & C. Sandwich Shop and used by the latter in operating its business in a building rented from appellant and situated in the city of Corpus Christi. The chattel mortgage was executed on April '7, 1930, whereas, the lease contract of tenancy, upon which appellant asserted his lien, was executed on December 15, 1930. Subsequently the chattel mortgage and obligation secured by it were renewed for the balance) due upon the original debt secured.

Appellant seeks to defeat the priority of the original lien upon the contention that the'renewal thereof released the prior lien; that appellee’s right to priority must be meas■ured by the renewal. We overrule this contention, upon the well-established rule that the taking of a second mortgage to secure the debt secured by a first mortgage on the same property does not operate as a satisfaction and release in law of the first mortgage, in the absence of an express or established intention to effect such release. 9 Tex. Jur. pp. 105, 185, §§ 22, 79.

We do not think that appellee’s failure to specifically plead the renewal presented a fatal variance between pleading and proof, so as to defeat recovery upon the original debt and lien.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

SMITH, Justice.

The appeal involves the question of the priority of a landlord’s lien asserted by appellant over a chattel mortgage lien asserted by appellee, upon certain supplies purchased.from appellee by the A. & C. Sandwich Shop and used by the latter in operating its business in a building rented from appellant and situated in the city of Corpus Christi. The chattel mortgage was executed on April '7, 1930, whereas, the lease contract of tenancy, upon which appellant asserted his lien, was executed on December 15, 1930. Subsequently the chattel mortgage and obligation secured by it were renewed for the balance) due upon the original debt secured.

Appellant seeks to defeat the priority of the original lien upon the contention that the'renewal thereof released the prior lien; that appellee’s right to priority must be meas■ured by the renewal. We overrule this contention, upon the well-established rule that the taking of a second mortgage to secure the debt secured by a first mortgage on the same property does not operate as a satisfaction and release in law of the first mortgage, in the absence of an express or established intention to effect such release. 9 Tex. Jur. pp. 105, 185, §§ 22, 79.

We do not think that appellee’s failure to specifically plead the renewal presented a fatal variance between pleading and proof, so as to defeat recovery upon the original debt and lien.

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

66 S.W.2d 1094, 1933 Tex. App. LEXIS 1711, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sherman-v-texas-hotel-supply-co-texapp-1933.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack