Kaysing v. Hughes

Citations

• 64 Ill. 123

Syllabus

<p>1. Chattel mobtgage—validity of. In the commencement of a chattel mortgage the consideration therefor was stated to be §601.25, while the debt, afterwards accurately described, and to secure which the mortgage was given, was a much smaller sum: Reid, that such discrepancy between the consideration mentioned and the sum secured did not atfect the validity of the mortgage—did not render it fraudulent per se and void.</p> <p>2. The mortgage was not, for that reason, inadmissible as evidence in an action of replevin wherein the mortgagee claimed the property in controversy under and by virtue of the mortgage.</p>