The Federal Reporter with Key-Number Annotations, Volume 256: Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit Courts of Appeals and District Courts of the United States, May-July, 1919. Page: 54
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
256 FEDERAL REPORTER
In Creelman Lumber Co. v. Lesh & Co:, 73 Ark. 16, 83 S. W. 320,
3 Ann. Cas. 108, it was decided that where personal property removed
to Arkansas was covered by a mortgage executed and recorded in
another state, it will be good by comity, and the lien created by such
mortgage was not misplaced by such removal. In that case the re-
moval of the property from the state of its execution was without the
consent of the mortgagee. That fact distinguishes it from the in-
stant case, wherein the mortgaged property was removed from Illi-
nois with the consent of the mortgagees. Whether the court would
have sustained'the lien through comity in the Creelman Case, supra,
had it appeared that the property was removed out of the state where
the mortgage was executed with the consent of the mortgagee, is not
determined, although it appears the minority of the court was of
opinion that it should so decide. Hill, C. J., in concurring opinion, 73
Ark. 16, 83 S. W. 320, 3 Ann. Cas. 108.
Judge Thayer, speaking for the Circuit Court of Appeals for the
Eighth Circuit, in a case quite similar to this one, which arose under
Arkansas law, said:
"The general consensus of judicial opinion seems to be that when personal
property, which at the time is situated in a given state, is there mortgaged by
the owner, and the mortgage is duly executed and recorded in the mode re-
quired by the local law so as to create a valid lien, the lien remains good and
effectual, although the property is removed to another state, either with or
without the consent of the mortgagee, and although the mortgage is not record-
ed in the state to which the removal is made. The mortgage lien is given ef-
fect, however, in the state to which the property is removed, solely by virtue
of the doctrine of comity." Shapard v. Hynes, 104 Fed. 449, 45 C. C. A. 271,
52 L. R. A. 675.
This court called upon to determine and give effect to the laws of
Arkansas, in the absence of decisions of the question in point by the
highest court of that state, feels bound by the rule announced in Shap-
ard v. Hynes, supra.
 But, if mistaken in this, then I am of opinion that it was not
necessary to the registration of the mortgage in Arkansas that it should
have been reacknowledged by the mortgagor in order to effect a lien
on the property covered by it and which had been removed into that
state. The lien already existed by virtue of the execution and reg-
istration of the instrument in Illinois, and was good everywhere as
between the mortgagor and mortgagees. If necessary to register again
in Arkansas, it was not for the purpose of validating a lien; but to
give constructive notice of the already existing lien to the people of
Crittenden county, Ark. Shapard v. Hynes, supra; Alferitz v. In-
galls (C. C.) 83 Fed. 965; Smead v. Chandler, 71 Ark. 517, 76 S. W.
1066, 65 L. R. A. 353; Dodd v. Parker, 40 Ark. 536; Ringo v. Wing,
49 Ark. 457, 5 S. W. 787.
 It is insisted, however, that a chattel mortgage legally executed
between parties and on chattels in another state, if such property be
removed to Arkansas with consent of the mortgagee, it must be re-
acknowledged according to the requirements of law in that state for
deeds to real estate in order to make it a valid lien as to third parties.
Kirby & Castle's Digest Ark. 840, 844, 6397. This is true as to
Here’s what’s next.
This document can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Legislative Document.
The Federal Reporter with Key-Number Annotations, Volume 256: Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit Courts of Appeals and District Courts of the United States, May-July, 1919., legislative document, 1919; Saint Paul, Minnesota. (digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc38827/m1/68/: accessed July 25, 2017), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.