From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cozzi v. Pizzo

Appellate Court of Illinois, First District
Mar 1, 1949
337 Ill. App. 384 (Ill. App. Ct. 1949)

Opinion

Gen. No. 44,399. (Abstract of Decision.)

Opinion filed March 1, 1949 Released for publication May 12, 1949

FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCES, § 105nonapplicability of Bulk Sales Act to mortgagee under chattel mortgage. Even if vendor, when executing affidavit under Bulk Sales Act in connection with sale of vendor's tavern and personalty therein, informed vendee and assignee of chattel mortgage given to vendor that vendor's judgment creditor was not included in list of vendor's creditors contained in affidavit, assignee's failure to give creditor notice of assignment did not render mortgage and assignment thereof void as to creditor or impose liability upon assignee under Act where record showed that mortgage and assignment were otherwise valid, since Act does not apply to mortgagee under a chattel mortgage; hence judgment against assignee in garnishment proceedings for benefit of creditor was improper (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1947, ch. 12 1/2, par. 78; Jones Ill. Stats. Ann. 121.01).

See Callaghan's Illinois Digest, same topic and section number.

Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. JOSEPH H. McGARRY, Judge, presiding.

Reversed. Heard in the second division, first district, this court at the April term, 1948.

Cohen Weiss, for appellant;

Marvin Patrick Cohen, of counsel;

Bernard P. Barasa and Moss Inlander, for appellee;

Walter E. Moss, of counsel.


Not to be published in full. Opinion filed March 1, 1949; released for publication May 12, 1949.


Summaries of

Cozzi v. Pizzo

Appellate Court of Illinois, First District
Mar 1, 1949
337 Ill. App. 384 (Ill. App. Ct. 1949)
Case details for

Cozzi v. Pizzo

Case Details

Full title:Paul Cozzi, Appellee, v. Joseph Pizzo, Defendant. Appeal of Samuel A…

Court:Appellate Court of Illinois, First District

Date published: Mar 1, 1949

Citations

337 Ill. App. 384 (Ill. App. Ct. 1949)
86 N.E.2d 294

Citing Cases

In re Central Metallic Casket Co.

Only persons contemplated by the Act and designated therein are subject to its restrictions and entitled to…