Aldrich v. Goodell

Citations

• 75 Ill. 452

Syllabus

<p>1. Chattel mortgage—when sale under it presumed to ham been according to power. Where a party had given a chattel mortgage upon the furniture in a hotel, and afterwards, with the consent of the mortgagee, sold the same to another party, who assumed to pay a portion of the debt to the mortgagee, and the mortgagor gave the mortgagee his notes for the balance due, including an additional indebtedness secured by mortgage on real estate, and on bill to foreclose this latter mortgage by an assignee, the mortgagor set up in defense the sale of the furniture by the mortgagee under the chattel mortgage, and asked for an account of the proceeds of such sale, with a view to have the overplus, if any, credited upon the notes sought to be collected by foreclosure, there being no irregularity charged in the sale under the mortgage, it was held not incumbent on the complainant to produce in evidence the chattel mortgage, as it would be presumed that it was an ordinary mortgage with the ordinary power of sale, and that the sale was made in accordance with the power.</p> <p>2. Assignor — when liable without diligence. Where, at the maturity of the first of two assigned promissory notes, one of the makers has left the State, and the other maker is insolvent, and at the time of the maturity of the second, both of the makers have left the State, these facts will excuse any diligence of the holder by suit, and the liability of the indorsers will become fixed without such suit against the makers.</p> <p>8. Collateral security — damages for neglect to enforce. Where a party who has assigned promissory notes secured by mortgage upon real estate, seeks to recover or have allowed him damages for a neglect to enforce payment by foreclosure, or otherwise, he must show that he has sustained damage in consequence of such neglect. The party receiving such notes can be liable only for the actual damages occasioned thereby.</p>