¶1(specially concurring). I concur in the above opinion, but on the sole ground that there is no proof that the bank had any notice or knowledge of the claim or lien of the plaintiff at the time the chattel mortgage was given to it by Ambrosius. I am satisfied that the contract gave to the plaintiff such a claim or lien.
39 ND 83
Hopper v. Howard
Decided December 12, 1917
North Dakota Supreme Court · decided 1917-12-12
A. Pollock, Judge. Plaintiff appeals. Under a farming contract providing that the owner shall have and retain title and possession of all the crops raised thereunder and shall have the right to payment out of the share that might ultimately belong to the tenant or worker of the farm for all debts due him from such tenant, and for all advances made to such tenant, the owner of the land is the absolute owner and entitled to the possession of all of the crops grown, until the…
Affirmed · Decided 1917-12-12