37 Mo. App. 43 | Mo. Ct. App. | 1889
The plaintiff recovered judgment in the - circuit court, against defendant Bilby, in the sum of $928.95, for an alleged conversion of twenty-five head of cattle, and defendant has appealed to this court. One Edmund Cooper, of Cass county, Nebraska, owned and held the cattle where he resided, from November, 1886, to sometime in January, 1887, when he consigned them to the Kansas City stock yards, and they were there sold to defendant Bilby,- and he had them on his farm in Nodaway county, Missouri, when and where plaintiff demanded said cattle, and, being refused, brought this action for their value. .. .
The foregoing comprise all of .the facts, which for the purpose of our decision are necessary to be here stated.
A number of questions are presented in briefs of counsel, but it seems there is one insuperable obstacle, presented on the face of this record, to the right of recovery in the plaintiff. The chattel mortgage, upon which plaintiff relies, did not impart notice to the defendant of plaintiff’s rights, if any,he had, to the cattle in controversy.
The description in the mortgage covered the three-year old steers branded with both the “sardine-box” brand on the leftside, and the Z brand on the two hips.
A steer branded simply with the “sardine box” on. the left side, and not with the Z brand on the two hips, did not fill that description. It is true that parol evidence may be called in to explain the circumstances, and thereby fit the description, as given in the mortgage, to certain property intended to be mortgaged, but
Parol evidence may be called in to aid an imperfect description, but not to contradict, or affix to the mortgage one different from that therein contained. See authorities supra.
It is unnecessary to further discuss the various points raised in this cause. Since this mortgage gave plaintiff no rights in these cattle as against defendant Bilby, the judgment below should have been for the defendant. Judgment reversed.