Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

72 Ill. App. 519

Snydacker v. Blatchley

Appellate Court of Illinois

Decided December 2, 1897

Appellate Court of Illinois · decided 1897-12-02

<p>1. Warehouses—Certain Receipts Held to be Warehouse Receipts andan Agreement Held to be a Mortgage.—The court reviews the evidence in this case and holds that certain of the appellees were holders of warehouse receipts signed by insolvent, and that the written instrument constituting the contract between insolvent and appellants was not a warehouse receipt but á sale by way of mortgage.</p>

Decided 1897-12-02

Mr. Justice Burroughs

¶1delivered the opinion of the Court.

¶2Upon examination of the record in this case we are satisfied that appellees E. V. Baldwin, Loyal P. Griswold, S. N. Griswold and S. P. McCracken established on the trial in the court below the material facts alleged in their petition, and therefore were the holders of warehouse receipts for the grades of wheat they delivered to insolvent, Blatchley, to be stored in his public warehouse of grade “ B ” at White Hall, Illinois, at a storage charge of half a cent per bushel per month for the term stated, except the first month, said wheat, or the like grade of wheat, to be by said Blatchley delivered to them on demand, as contended for by them in the pleadings filed in the trial court, and were therefore entitled to a lien on the wheat in question in this case. We are also satisfied that appellants’ written instrument set out in his petition to the County Court, constituting the contract between them and insolvent, Blatchley, was not a “ warehouse receipt,” as contended by them, but a sale by way of mortgage, by insolvent, Blatchley, to them, of 6,000 bushels of wheat, at the date of said writing, then in his elevator at White Hall, and that from the evidence it appears that said Blatchley, long before said assignment, had delivered to appellants the wheat described in said writing, but that said Blatchley still owes appellees the indebtedness contended for by them, but they have no lien on the wheat in question.

¶3We are of the opinion that the final order and decree rendered herein by the County Court of Greene County is in accordance with the law and the evidence in this case, therefore we affirm it.

¶4Decree affirmed.

/72/illapp/519 · .json · Public domain