Tisdale v. John H. Pray Sons Co.

62 A. 168, 73 N.H. 357, 1905 N.H. LEXIS 55
Supreme Court of New Hampshire·Decided October 3, 1905·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Bingham, J.

The affidavit contained in the mortgage, if otherwise sufficient, was not signed and sworn to by the mortgagee. The statute requires that the mortgagee as well as the mortgagor shall take and subscribe to the oath. P. S., c. 140, s. 6. This must be done to entitle a mortgage of personal property to registration. The unauthorized registration of such an instrument is-not constructive notice of its existence. Lovell v. Osgood, 60 N. H. 71. The defendants’ attachments having been made while the-mortgaged property was in the possession of the mortgagors, and without knowledge, actual or constructive, of the existence of the mortgage, must prevail.

Exception overruled.

All concurred.

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

Tisdale v. John H. Pray Sons Co., 62 A. 168, 73 N.H. 357, 1905 N.H. LEXIS 55 (N.H. 1905).

62 A. 168 (Tisdale v. John H. Pray Sons Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Holmgren v. Keene Oil Co.
10 F. Supp. 211 (D. New Hampshire, 1935)