Deutschle v. Wilson, 8709.

Decision Date08 March 1930
Docket NumberNo. 8709.,8709.
Citation39 F.2d 406
PartiesDEUTSCHLE v. WILSON et al.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit

Merrill Gilmore, of Ottumwa, Iowa (K. E. Willcockson and Edwin Willcockson, both of Sigourney, Iowa, and Edwin G. Moon, of Ottumwa, Iowa, on the brief), for appellant.

Charles C. Heninger, of Sigourney, Iowa, and Walter McNett, of Ottumwa, Iowa, for appellee.

Before STONE and BOOTH, Circuit Judges, and REEVES, District Judge.

REEVES, District Judge.

Appellant sued the receiver of the First National Bank of Hedrick, Iowa, and others on account of a deposit, which he says he made in said bank prior to receivership, to wit, October 24, 1924.

The court below sustained a motion to strike from the files the whole of appellant's substituted petition. This was done upon the several grounds that such pleading was but a repetition of a former petition, parts of which had been stricken out on motion, and that said substituted petition contained no averments of material facts showing a cause of action against appellees.

Appellant elected to stand on his pleading, and upon the dismissal of the case appealed to this court.

The substituted petition was in two counts. The first count contained averments to the effect that appellant deposited in said bank the sum of $1,677.33, and received in return therefore a certificate of deposit in words and figures as follows, to wit:

"Hedrick, Iowa, Oct. 24, 1924 No. 17003. "Peter Deutschle has deposited in Savings Department First National Bank Hedrick State Savings Bank $1,677.33 72-641 Savings Department First National Bank Sixteen Hundred Seventy-seven Dollars Thirty-three Cents Dollars payable to the order of self March 1, 1925, after date on the return of this certificate properly endorsed with interest at the rate of 4 per cent per annum. W. W. Young, Cashier. "Interest ceases at Maturity "Not subject to check."

It will be noted that the words "Savings Department First National Bank" appear twice in said certificate. It is alleged that they were "stamped in the instrument." There is a further averment "that the words `Savings Department First National Bank,' where the same first appear on the original writing, were stamped upon and over a part of the printed words `Hedrick State Savings Bank.'"

After asserting presentation of his claim to the receiver and denial of liability, appellant prayed for judgment on said certificate for the face amount thereof, with interest at 4 per cent. until maturity and thereafter for interest computed at 6 per cent.

The second count of the petition contains substantially the same averments. It is supplemented, however, with allegations as to the circumstances and preliminary negotiations in respect of the deposit. In these particulars appellant alleged that on the day he made the deposit he went into the banking house of the said First National Bank for that purpose; that the inscriptions on the premises occupied by said bank indicated that said bank was the sole occupant, and that there were no inscriptions or indicia of other occupancy; that he did not know that the Hedrick State Savings Bank, a state institution, occupied the same quarters; that he had a conversation with W. W. Young, who was then cashier of said First National Bank; that plaintiff then stated to said cashier that he desired to make deposit of his funds in said First National Bank; and that he delivered the amount of said deposit to the said W. W. Young, who thereupon executed and delivered to him the instrument sued on.

There is a further allegation of fraudulent concealment of the fact that the Hedrick State Savings Bank occupied the same quarters.

On the second count appellant prayed judgment as on the first.

An examination of the former petition, with motions directed against if, the several court orders, and the memorandum opinion of the court, indicates that the action of the court was predicated upon the theory that said petition, as well as the one under review, failed to state a cause of action in favor of the appellant and against the appellees. Under these circumstances this court will look only to the question of the sufficiency of the substituted petition and thus determine whether the court erred in ordering it stricken from the files.

1. Obviously, the suit is upon a certificate of deposit alleged to have been issued by the First National Bank to appellant before insolvency. In the first count of his petition the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Thompson v. Baltimore & OR Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Missouri
    • 2 Febrero 1945
    ...Ohmer, 2 Cir., 1917, 244 F. 31; Neal v. Akers, 4 Cir., 1923, 286 F. 903; Walter v. Rowlands, 9 Cir., 1928, 28 F.2d 687; Deutschle v. Wilson, 8 Cir., 1930, 39 F.2d 406; Interior Linseed Co. v. Becker-Moore Paint Co., 1918, 273 Mo. 433, 202 S.W. 566; National Bank v. Flanagan Mills & Elevator......
  • Pearl Assur. Co. v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co. of Hartford, Conn.
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • 28 Marzo 1940
    ... ... 651, 17 So. 615; Rice Oil Co. v. Atlas Assur ... Co., 9 Cir., 102 F.2d 561; Deutschle v. Wilson, 8 ... Cir., 39 F.2d 406; Independence Indemnity Co. v ... Jones & Son, 9 Cir., 64 ... ...
  • Severson v. Fleck
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of South Dakota
    • 27 Febrero 1957
    ...insertion the typewritten statement prevails." That this is a well-established rule of law is beyond question. See: Deutschle v. Wilson, 8 Cir., 39 F.2d 406; Hagan v. Scottish Union & National Insurance Company, 186 U.S. 423, 22 S.Ct. 862, 46 L.Ed. 1229; Baum v. National Finance Co., 108 Co......
  • THE IDEFJORD
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • 25 Noviembre 1940
    ...would be preferred if there were any inconsistency between them. Pacific Rice Mills v. Westfeldt Bros., 5 Cir., 31 F.2d 979; Deutschle v. Wilson, 8 Cir., 39 F.2d 406; Thomas v. Taggart, 209 U.S. 385, 389, 28 S.Ct. 519, 52 L.Ed. 845, affirming In re Jacob Berry & Co., 2 Cir., 149 F. 176. In ......
  • 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