Davis Bros. v. Fort Dodge Nat. Bank
| Citation | 216 Iowa 277,249 N.W. 170 |
| Decision Date | 20 June 1933 |
| Docket Number | No. 41848.,41848. |
| Parties | Bros v. Fort Dodge Nat. Bank |
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from District Court, Webster County; H. E. Fry, Judge.
Action to enjoin the defendant from paying certain moneys to L. A. Andrew, receiver of the Farmers' Savings Bank of Manson, Iowa, and demanding payment of said moneys to the plaintiff. From a decree in favor of the defendant, the plaintiff appeals.
Affirmed.
John M. Schaupp, of Fort Dodge, for appellant.
Gray & Gray, of Rockwell City, for appellee L. A. Andrew.
At all times involved herein, the plaintiff was engaged in the general grain business and operated an elevator at Manson, Iowa. One Emma Schaupp, a resident of Fort Dodge, Iowa, was the owner of certain grain which was sold to plaintiff's elevator, and on the 24th day of September, 1931, said grain was paid for by a check drawn on the Farmers' Savings Bank by the said plaintiff in the sum of $514.61. This check was duly indorsed to the Fort Dodge National Bank in payment of a note owed by Emma Schaupp to said national bank on the 25th day of September, 1931, and on the same day the Fort Dodge National charged the same to the account of the Manson bank, which had sufficient money on hand to meet the same and forwarded the same, with other checks, to the Manson bank, together with a remittance letter. They reached the Manson bank on the morning of September 26th, and this check was not charged to the account of the plaintiff in the Manson bank, although there was more than enough money in its account to pay the same.
The Manson bank did not open on the morning of September 27th, and, on September 28th, Andrew, superintendent of banking, was appointed receiver thereof. After taking possession of said bank, Andrew found this check and remittance letter, together with certain other checks, and immediately returned the same to the Fort Dodge National, who credited this check back to the account of the Manson bank, and called upon Emma Schaupp, as indorser, to make the same good. This was done, and the check was returned to Mrs. Schaupp. She then presented the same to the plaintiff and received from plaintiff the aforesaid sum of $514.61.
The evidence satisfactorily shows that there was an agreement between the Manson bank and the Fort Dodge National Bank that all checks drawn on the Manson bank and received by the Fort Dodge National Bank were to be paid from the depository account of the Manson bank in the Fort Dodge bank, which agreement had existed for many years. It was also a part of the understanding between these parties that, if checks drawn on the Manson bank came into the hands of the Fort Dodge National Bank, the Fort Dodge bank would promptly forward the same to the Manson bank, and, if there were no funds to meet the same, or if, for any other reason the Manson bank did not wish to honor the check, the Manson bank would promptly wire the Fort Dodge bank of such refusal. This was not done as to the check in controversy herein.
The facts so far are not seriously disputed.
After this check was taken up by the plaintiff from the Schaupps, plaintiff instituted this action seeking to hold an amount equivalent to said check from the funds in the hands of the Manson bank in the Fort Dodge bank. Andrew, receiver, defends, claiming that he, as such receiver, is entitled to all of the funds in the hands of the Fort Dodge National Bank, and plaintiff is not entitled to any part thereof.
[1] Many cases of this court are cited by the respective counsel on their contentions herein, but we fail to find any which apply to this exact situation. It is settled that the relation between the Manson bank and the Fort Dodge National Bank was that of debtor and creditor. Leach v. Battle Creek Savings Bank, 202 Iowa, 871, 211 N. W. 519.
[2] It is also settled that the title to this check passed by indorsement to the Fort Dodge...
To continue reading
Request your trial