Barnett v. First Nat. Bank of Chariton

• Citation: 127 N.W. 1012,148 Iowa 667
• Parties: MARTHA BARNETT, Appellee, v. FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF CHARITON, and J. H. JAMISON, Receiver, Appellant
• Decision Date: 24 October 1910
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

127 N.W. 1012

148 Iowa 667

MARTHA BARNETT, Appellee, v. FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF CHARITON, and J. H. JAMISON, Receiver, Appellant

Supreme Court of Iowa, Des Moines

October 24, 1910

Appeal from Lucas District Court.--HON. M. A. ROBERTS, Judge.

ACTION to recover the value of some notes left by plaintiff with the First National Bank of Chariton for safe-keeping. Defendant filed a general denial and also pleaded an estoppel. On the issues joined the case was tried to the court, resulting in finding for plaintiff and establishing her claim against the receiver. Defendant receiver appeals.

Affirmed.

O. A and L. B. Bartholomew, for appellant.

W. W Bulman, for appellee.

OPINION

DEEMER, C. J.

Plaintiff claims to have left certain notes for safe-keeping with the First National Bank of Chariton, the business being done by one Crocker, the cashier; that the bank failed, and her notes have never been returned to her, although demand has been made therefor. Defendant denies the deposit of the notes, says the transaction, if there was one, was between plaintiff and Crocker individually, and further pleads an estoppel, which plea will hereafter be noticed.

I. Save for a ruling on evidence, the questions presented by this appeal are purely of fact. The ruling complained of is the action of the trial court in permitting plaintiff to testify to transactions with the cashier of the bank, one F. R. Crocker, who at the time of trial was deceased. The so-called "dead man's statute" does not apply to one who was a mere agent of the real party in interest. This has been held in many cases, and nowhere more squarely than in Reynolds v. Iowa & Neb. Co., 80 Iowa 563, 46 N.W. 659; Bellows v. Litchfield, 83 Iowa 36, 48 N.W. 1062; Salyers v. Monroe, 104 Iowa 74, 73 N.W. 606; French v. French, 84 Iowa 655, 51 N.W. 145. The evidence clearly shows that plaintiff dealt with Crocker as cashier of the bank, and he, Crocker, was not jointly liable with his bank, as defendant contends. The testimony was properly received.

II. While the testimony is not as convincing as it might be, due to plaintiff's age and her manner of doing business, we think it sufficient to sustain the action of the trial court in allowing plaintiff's claim. We shall not set it out. The most significant thing in the whole case is a piece of paper in Crocker's own handwriting given to plaintiff at the time she made the last deposit of notes and received some cash from Crocker for her personal needs. This piece of paper shows that at the time it was given plaintiff had in the bank in cash and notes $ 2,176.42. This paper, although not signed by Crocker, was shown to be in his handwriting, and it was admissible in evidence as an admission, if not a formal receipt.

III....