Cerney v. Pawlot

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
Writing for the CourtLYON
Citation66 Wis. 262,28 N.W. 183
Decision Date15 May 1886
PartiesCERNEY v. PAWLOT AND OTHERS.

66 Wis. 262
28 N.W. 183

CERNEY
v.
PAWLOT AND OTHERS.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

May 15, 1886.


Appeal from circuit court, Kewaunee county.

The action was brought to foreclose a mortgage on 40 acres of land in Kewaunee county, executed by the defendants Joseph Pawlot and wife to the plaintiff, by the name of Josepha Drichta. The mortgage was dated July 3, 1868, and recorded in the proper office four days later. The condition thereof was the payment by the mortgagors to the mortgagee of $200 in five years from the date thereof, without interest, according to a note of the same date executed to the plaintiff by the mortgagor, Joseph Pawlot. Four other persons, alleged to have or claim some interest in the mortgaged premises accruing subsequently to the mortgage, and subject to it, are made defendants in the action. Mathias Drichta was the father of the plaintiff. He owned the mortgaged land in 1868, and conveyed, or caused the same to be conveyed, to the defendant, Joseph Pawlot. The mortgage in suit, and the note it was given to secure, was for a portion of the purchase money, and were executed to the plaintiff by direction of her father. Pawlot delivered the same to Mathias, who procured the mortgage to be recorded, and retained the note and mortgage in his own hands. The plaintiff was then about 15 years old. In 1869 Mathias attempted to release the mortgage by an entry in the record thereof as follows:

“I, Joseph Drichta, hereby acknowledge satisfaction and payment in full of these mortgage, and discharge the same of record.

Dated May 6, A. D. 1869.

JOSEPH his X mark. DRICHTA.

Done in presence of

FRED. JOHANNES, Register.”

He then destroyed both the note and the mortgage. At the same time Pawlot conveyed the mortgaged lot to one Wandrash by deed of quitclaim. Afterwards Wandrash conveyed the land in parcels to some of these defendants. The circuit court found that the mortgage debt was paid to Mathias. In 1871 the plaintiff intermarried with one Cerney. Mathias Drichta died in 1882. It does not appear that he left any children other than the plaintiff. He left surviving him a wife, who is the mother of Mrs. Pawlot, but not of the plaintiff. This action was commenced in 1883. The foregoing facts appear by the pleadings, proofs, and findings. The court also found that Mathias did not intend the note and mortgage as an advancement to his daughter, and held her chargeable with laches, fatal to her action, in that she did not assert her alleged rights earlier. The conclusions of law are that the plaintiff has no title to the note and mortgage, or interest therein; and that the payment to Mathias Drichta of the debt secured by the mortgage is conclusive against the plaintiff. The plaintiff appeals from a judgment against her dismissing her complaint on the merits, with costs.

[28 N.W. 184]

Sedgwick & Byron, for appellant, Josepha Cerney.

Timlin & Manseau, for respondents, Joseph Pawlot and others.


LYON, J.

1. That there was an effectual delivery of the note and mortgage by the defendant Joseph Powlot, the mortgagor and maker of the note either to Mathias Drichta or the plaintiff, is undisputed and indisputable. The circuit court held, substantially, that the delivery was to Mathias Drichta, and not the plaintiff. That is the significance of the conclusions of law that the plaintiff had no interest in the securities, and was concluded by the payment of the mortgage debt to her father. Whether, in the light of established legal principles, such ruling can be upheld, is the main question in the case.

By the direction and procurement of her father, who paid the consideration therefor, the note and mortgage were executed to the plaintiff, who was named as payee in the note, and mortgagee in the mortgage. Presumptively,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 practice notes
  • Fitzgerald v. Flanagan
    • United States
    • Iowa Supreme Court
    • April 10, 1912
    ...v. Shrum, 97 Tenn. 259, 36 S. W. 1089;Fievel v. Zuber, 67 Tex. 275, 3 S. W. 273; Criss v. Criss, 28 W. Va. 388; Cerney v. Pawlot, 66 Wis. 262, 28 N. W. 183;Ball v. Wyeth, 8 Allen (Mass.) 275;Damon v. Deeves, 57 Mich. 247, 23 N. W. 798;Northrop v. Chase, 76 Conn. 146, 56 Atl. 518;Satterlund ......
  • Ed. Fitzgerald v. Flanagan
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • April 10, 1912
    ...Irvine v. Shrum, 97 Tenn. 259 (36 S.W. 1089); Fievel v. Zuber, 67 Tex. 275 (3 S.W. 273); Criss v. Criss, 28 W.Va. 388; Cerney v. Pawlot, 66 Wis. 262 (28 N.W. 183); Ball v. Wyeth, 90 Mass. 275, 8 Allen 275; Damon v. Deeves, 57 Mich. 247 (23 N.W. 798); Northrop v. Chase, 76 Conn. 146 (56 A. 5......
  • Butts v. Richards
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
    • February 26, 1913
    ...by words without acts. Bogie v. Bogie, 35 Wis. 659, 666. Conversely, it may also be accomplished by acts without words. Cerney v. Pawlot, 66 Wis. 262, 28 N. W. 183;Bates v. Winters, 138 Wis. 673, 120 N. W. 498. But the grantor must part with his dominion and control over the deed, with inte......
  • Wells Cnty. v. McHenry
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of North Dakota
    • January 31, 1898
    ...is barred by the statute. See Norton v. Palmer, 142 Mass. 433, 8 N. E. 346;Shaw v. Silloway, 145 Mass. 503, 14 N. E. 783;Cerney v. Pawlot, 66 Wis. 262, 28 N. W. 183;Coles v. Withers, 33 Grat. 186; Smith v. Railroad Co., Id. 617; Lashbrooks v. Hatheway, 52 Mich. 124, 17 N. W. 723;Webber v. R......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
15 cases
  • Fitzgerald v. Flanagan
    • United States
    • Iowa Supreme Court
    • April 10, 1912
    ...v. Shrum, 97 Tenn. 259, 36 S. W. 1089;Fievel v. Zuber, 67 Tex. 275, 3 S. W. 273; Criss v. Criss, 28 W. Va. 388; Cerney v. Pawlot, 66 Wis. 262, 28 N. W. 183;Ball v. Wyeth, 8 Allen (Mass.) 275;Damon v. Deeves, 57 Mich. 247, 23 N. W. 798;Northrop v. Chase, 76 Conn. 146, 56 Atl. 518;Satterlund ......
  • Ed. Fitzgerald v. Flanagan
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • April 10, 1912
    ...Irvine v. Shrum, 97 Tenn. 259 (36 S.W. 1089); Fievel v. Zuber, 67 Tex. 275 (3 S.W. 273); Criss v. Criss, 28 W.Va. 388; Cerney v. Pawlot, 66 Wis. 262 (28 N.W. 183); Ball v. Wyeth, 90 Mass. 275, 8 Allen 275; Damon v. Deeves, 57 Mich. 247 (23 N.W. 798); Northrop v. Chase, 76 Conn. 146 (56 A. 5......
  • Butts v. Richards
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
    • February 26, 1913
    ...by words without acts. Bogie v. Bogie, 35 Wis. 659, 666. Conversely, it may also be accomplished by acts without words. Cerney v. Pawlot, 66 Wis. 262, 28 N. W. 183;Bates v. Winters, 138 Wis. 673, 120 N. W. 498. But the grantor must part with his dominion and control over the deed, with inte......
  • Wells Cnty. v. McHenry
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of North Dakota
    • January 31, 1898
    ...is barred by the statute. See Norton v. Palmer, 142 Mass. 433, 8 N. E. 346;Shaw v. Silloway, 145 Mass. 503, 14 N. E. 783;Cerney v. Pawlot, 66 Wis. 262, 28 N. W. 183;Coles v. Withers, 33 Grat. 186; Smith v. Railroad Co., Id. 617; Lashbrooks v. Hatheway, 52 Mich. 124, 17 N. W. 723;Webber v. R......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT