Rio Grande Co v. Vinet

• Decision Date: 23 December 1889
• Citation: 33 L.Ed. 438,132 U.S. 565,10 S.Ct. 168
• Parties: RIO GRANDE R. CO. v. VINET et al
• Court: U.S. Supreme Court

132 U.S. 565

10 S.Ct. 168

33 L.Ed. 438

RIO GRANDE R. CO. v. VINET et al.

December 23, 1889.

Geo. L. Bright, for appellant.

J. D. Rouse and Wm. Grant, for appellees.

Mr. Justice MILLER, after stating the facts as above, delivered the opinion of the court.

The appellant, which was plaintiff below, obtained in the circuit court for the eastern district of Louisiana, on January 5, 1885, a judgment against the partnership firm of Gomila & Co. and against Anthony J. Gomila and Larned Torrey, who constituted the partnership, for the sum of $26,731.97. It caused an execution to be issued upon the judgment, and had it levied upon a house, and the grounds belonging to it, in the city of New Orleans, a description of which is set forth in the bill filed in this case. It was discovered that there existed a mortgage upon this property for the sum of $18,000, made by A. J. Gomila, and the railroad company brought the present suit by way of a bill in chancery to remove this incumbrance, as an obstruction to the successful exercise of its right to sell the property for the payment of its debt. The action commenced in the civil district court for the parish of Orleans was afterwards removed by Gomila into the circuit court of the United States, and the plaintiff there filed a new bill in equity, substantially the same as the petition filed in the state court.

This bill, after reciting the judgment in favor of the railroad company, already mentioned, and the levy of the execution under it on the property described, proceeds to state: 'That there is inscribed on the books of the recorder of mortgages for the parish of Orleans, against the name of Anthony J. Gomila, and against said property, an inscription of a mortgage made by said Anthony J. Gomila in favor of the commercial firm of Gomila & Co., by act before Samuel Flower, a notary public, dated the 8th of February, 1884, to secure the sum of $18,000.' According to the bill, this act recited an indebtedness by A. J. Gomila to the firm of Gomila & Co. for that much money loaned and advanced to him on that day, and that for said $18,000 he had made his four promissory notes to the order of and indorsed by himself. Three of these notes were for $5,000 each, and one for $3,000. The $5,000 notes were payable in one, two, and three years after date, respectively, and the $3,000 note was payable three years after date.

The bill then alleges that 'said mortgage is fictitious, and is a fraud committed by said A. J. Gomila to cover his property, and to prevent the seizure and sale thereof; that it is not true, as stated in said act of mortgage, that on the 8th of February, 1884, the said firm of Gomila & Co. loaned and advanced to A. J. Gomila the sum of $18,000, or any other sum of money; and your petitioner alleges that by reason of said fraud the aforesaid notes, amounting in all to $18,000, are null and void; that, after they were made and received by Larned Torrey, who accepted the act of mortgage, they were surrendered to A. J. Gomila, and thereby were canceled, and they have been ever since in his custody, or under his control, or in the custody and control of some confederate, whom, when discovered, your petitioner prays leave to make a party hereto;' and the prayer of the bill is that these notes be canceled and annulled, and that Gomila be required to surrender them up, and for such further relief as the nature of the case may require.

Supplemental and amended bills were filed, making defendants to the suit J. Ward Gurley, Jr., and C. D. Barker, upon the allegation that they claim to be the owners of the notes, and assert the sufficiency and validity of the mortgage by which they are pretended to be secured, and they are required to answer the allegations of the original bill, and to set forth the nature of their claim. A. J. Gomila answered the bill, and, to special interrogatories propounded to him in it, he answered, under oath, as follows:

'To the first of said interrogatories, which reads as follows, viz.,

'To whom did you deliver the notes described in the original bill on file, and when did you do so? Give his full name and address '—he answers, viz.:

'Answer. The notes were all delivered to Larned Torrey, the other member of the firm of Gomila & Co., when they were made or executed, February 8, 1884.'

To the second of said interrogatories, which reads as follows, viz.,

'In whose possession have said notes been at all and any time up to the present time?

'—he answers, viz.:

'A. The said notes were immediately thereafter delivered to J. Ward Gurley, Jr., of this city, from whom Gomila & Co. received the following sums of cash, viz.: On 6th February, 1884, ($3,496.50,) three thousand four hundred and ninety-six and 50-100 dollars; on February 11, 1884, ($1,498.50), one thousand four hundred and ninety-eight and 50-100 dollars; on 20th February, 1884, ($1,000,) one thousand dollars; besides some city bonds at various dates just before and subsequently, other small sums of money for costs in different suits, etc.,—all of which is still due said Gurley, with interest thereon, that...