{
  "id": 5242924,
  "name": "Charles M. Henderson, Appellant, v. Nathan Morgan, Appellee",
  "name_abbreviation": "Henderson v. Morgan",
  "decision_date": "1861-04",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "431",
  "last_page": "432",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "26 Ill. 431"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill.",
    "id": 8772,
    "name": "Illinois Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 127,
    "char_count": 1895,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.612,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.7102457200946847e-07,
      "percentile": 0.8292688106526674
    },
    "sha256": "3b9e27510870ac7c4d6a3ab0a4eea15e9a51c52e25150cd3b4e79713f45a73ef",
    "simhash": "1:be51da215a670dae",
    "word_count": 312
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:13:16.085569+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Charles M. Henderson, Appellant, v. Nathan Morgan, Appellee."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Caton, C. J.\nThe acknowledgment of this chattel mortgage was insufficient. The statute says, the mortgagor \u201cmay acknowledge such mortgage before any justice of the peace in the justice\u2019s district in which he may reside,\u201d and there is no other authority in the statute for acknowledging, and it follows as a matter of course, the mortgage cannot have the effect prescribed by the statute, unless it is acknowledged in conformity to the statute. The word \u201c may,\u201d in this statute, is imperative. The meaning of the statute is, that the mortgage shall be acknowledged before a justice of the district in which the mortgagor resides. It was for the legislature to determine where the mortgage should be acknowledged, and it is not for us to inquire whether it would not have been as well to have the acknowledgment and memorandum made in the district where the property was situate. The district in this statute means election district. The judgment is affirmed.\nJudgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Caton, C. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Helm & Clark, for Appellant.",
      "Gookins, Thomas & Roberts, for Appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Charles M. Henderson, Appellant, v. Nathan Morgan, Appellee.\nappeal from cook.\nA chattel mortgage, to be valid, should be acknowledged before a justice of the peace of the election district in which the mortgagor resides.\nThis was an action of replevin brought by the appellant, who claimed the property as mortgagee, by virtue of a chattel mortgage. The mortgage was acknowledged by a justice of the peace in the town of North Chicago, and the mortgagor \u201c resided\u201d in another town.\nThe appellee was a creditor of the mortgagor, and seized the property by virtue of a landlord\u2019s warrant for rent due and unpaid from the mortgagor, the property being in the possession of the mortgagor when seized.\nThe Circuit Court held the mortgage invalid, and found for the defendant below.\nAppellant assigns for error, the finding of the issues for defendant.\nHelm & Clark, for Appellant.\nGookins, Thomas & Roberts, for Appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0431-01",
  "first_page_order": 431,
  "last_page_order": 432
}