
    THE CHATHAM NATIONAL BANK, Appellant, v. JAMES O’BRIEN, Sheriff, Respondent.
    
      Ohaitel mortgage — agreement that moiipagor may sett property — powm' of court to dvrect a verdict.
    
    “Where, in an action brought to recover property described in a chattel mortgage, the defendant alleges that the mortgage is void, because the mortgagors were authorized and allowed to sell the mortgaged property for their own benefit, the court cannot direct a verdict for the defendant unless an agreement has been made either in the mortgage itself or between the parties to it, the necessary construction of which permits such sales to be made. (Frost v. Wa/rreni 43 N. Y., 304; Gfczrdner v. McBwen, 19 id., 133; Bdgell v. Han't, 9 id., 313; Gi-iswold v. Sheldon, 4 id., 581; Ford v. Williams, 34-id., 359; Oonkling v. Shelley, 38 id., 860; Mitt&r v. Lockwood, 33 id., 393.)
    Appeal from a judgment in favor of the defendant, entered upon a verdict directed by the court.
    
      Abbott Brothers, for appellant. A. J. Yanderpoel and B. 8. Green, for respondent.
   Opinions by

Davis, P. J.,

and Bradt, J.. Daniels, J., concurred

with Davis, P. J.

Judgment reversed and new trial granted, costs to abide the event.  