Singer v. Farmers State Bank of Goodridge
Can I rely on this case?
Citation treatment has not been reviewed for this case. The notes below come from the citation graph and the Minnesota Revisor's amendment records, not from a review of how later courts treated this decision.
(as of 9/30/2026)
Last cited by a Minnesota appellate court in 1937, among the opinions in this site’s citation index.
Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
See our Terms of Use before relying on these notes. Report an error
Cases that cite this one
7 later published cases cite this decision.
- Goodrich Silvertown Stores of the B. F. Goodrich Co. v. A. & A. Credit System, Inc. (Minn. 1937)
- C. I. T. Corporation v. Cords (Minn. 1936)
- Nelson v. Ruthkowski (Minn. 1929)
- Munck v. Security State Bank of Owatonna (Minn. 1928)
- Glasser v. O'Brien (Minn. 1927)
- Southern Wisconsin Acceptance Co. v. Paull (Wis. 1927)
- Neils v. Bohlsen (Minn. 1930)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Plaintiff appeals from a judgment of dismissal. The facts appear in 161 Minn. 301, 201 N. W. 414.
It now appears that the mortgagee unconditionally, consented to the mortgagor selling the mortgaged Chattels. The finding of the trial court to that effect is sustained by the evidence. The lien of the mortgage was by such consent discharged. Fairweather v. Nelson, 76 Minn. 510, 79 N. W. 506; National Citizens Bank v. McKinley, 118 Minn. 162, 136 N. W. 579.
The principle of law correctly stated in the prior decision was inapplicable to the then facts of this case in this, that while the *328 bank in ordinary parlance was a creditor, it was not such under G. S. 1923, § 8345, which contemplates a creditor who has laid hold of the mortgaged property armed with legal process and not a general creditor. Ellingboe v. Brakken, 36 Minn. 156, 30 N. W. 659; Howe v. Cochran, 47 Minn. 403, 50 N. W. 368; Bradley, Clark & Co. v. Benson, 93 Minn. 91, 100 N. W. 670. The result previously reached was correct and could have rested on other grounds. We call attention to the inadvertence so that the decision will not be construed as extending the application of the rule beyond the authority of the cases herein cited.
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.