Murray v. Geiser Manufacturing Co.

Citations

• 79 Kan. 326
• 99 P. 589
• 1909 Kan. LEXIS 184

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Chattel Mortgages—Recording—Custody—Presumption. A chattel mortgage which is proved to have been duly filed in the proper office is presumed to have remained there until its removal is shown; its unexplained appearance later in some other place in the possession of the mortgagee may annul the presumption from that time on, but can have no retroactive effect. In spite of such appearance the presumption must be indulged that at all times prior thereto and subsequent to the filing the mortgage was in the custody of the register of deeds.</p> <p>2. Practice, District Court—Instructions—Definition—“Residence.” It is error to submit to a jury the question of the residence of a person without some definition of the term, where that is the controlling question in the case and is left in grave doubt by the evidence, and the attention of the court has been drawn to the necessity for an explanation on the subject, although the form in which the request for such an instruction is made may be open to objection.</p>