Atlantic Discount Corporation v. Young

• Decision Date: 01 March 1944
• Docket Number: 28.
• Citation: 29 S.E.2d 29,224 N.C. 89
• Parties: ATLANTIC DISCOUNT CORPORATION v. YOUNG.
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court

29 S.E.2d 29

224 N.C. 89

ATLANTIC DISCOUNT CORPORATION v. YOUNG.

No. 28.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

March 1, 1944

This was an action to recover a motor truck in the possession of defendants Worsley, by virtue of a mortgage thereon executed by C. L. Young or the Young Motor Company to the plaintiff.

At the conclusion of all the evidence, defendants' renewed motion for nonsuit was allowed. Plaintiff appealed.

W A. Worth and McMullan & McMullan, all of Elizabeth City for plaintiff.

T T. Thorne, of Rocky Mount, and R. Clarence Dozier, of Elizabeth City, for defendants.

DEVIN Justice.

Plaintiff's appeal from the judgment of nonsuit entered below brings up the question of the sufficiency of the evidence offered to make out a case for the possession of a mortgaged motor truck as against a subsequent purchaser for value. The question debated in the briefs, whether the mortgage had been properly admitted to registry so as to constitute notice to a subsequent purchaser, we need not decide as we think the judgment below should be sustained on another ground.

It was made to appear that subsequent to the execution of the mortgage on the motor truck described, to secure $850, the mortgagor, the Young Motor Company, an automobile dealer, sold the truck to defendants Worsley who paid the full price therefor, approximately $1,150, to the Motor Company. At the time of this transaction, which took place in Roanoke Rapids, a representative of the plaintiff, Mr. W. R. Curry, was present. The Young Motor Company or C. L. Young forwarded a check for the amount of the mortgage to plaintiff to its home office in Elizabeth City. However, the check proved to be worthless on account of insufficiency of funds. Thereafter this action was instituted to recover possession of the truck from the purchasers, the defendants Worsley.

There was evidence tending to show that plaintiff had been engaged for some time in the business of loaning money to Young Motor Company and taking mortgages on motor vehicles which were to be sold in the ordinary course of trade, and that the custom was for the purchasers of these cars to pay the money to the Motor Company, including the amounts due plaintiff, and that plaintiff's representative, whose duty it was to collect delinquent accounts and repossess cars, would 'pick up' this money and take it to the home office, or, as in this instance, it would be remitted by check. This practice continued as long as Young was in business.

Thus it seems to have been contemplated that the mortgaged vehicles were to be sold by Young, and that the purchasers of these vehicles so encumbered should pay the full price therefor to Young, and that he was authorized to receive the amounts due on the mortgages for the plaintiff. Defendants testified that plaintiff's...