Finnegan v. Ihinger
Decision Date | 19 July 1939 |
Docket Number | 34230. |
Citation | 92 P.2d 538,150 Kan. 357 |
Parties | FINNEGAN v. IHINGER et al. |
Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
Where Home Owners' Loan Corporation refused to permit house which was to be removed from seller's premises to buyers' land, to be placed on buyers' land unless mortgage on buyers' land was paid, and seller furnished money to pay mortgage and received mortgage in lieu of the Home Owners' Loan Corporation mortgage, which had been recorded prior to performance of labor on buyers' land by lien claimants, seller was entitled to be subrogated to rights of Home Owners' Loan Corporation and to priority over rights of lien claimants. Gen.St.1935, 60-1401.
Where a building was sold, and a chattel mortgage was executed for the purchase price thereof and other items and was recorded after building had been severed from seller's land, but before removal to buyers' land, and mortgage provided that building was to remain personalty until mortgage debt was paid, seller was entitled to priority over lien claimants who had performed services on buyers' land, to extent of the unpaid purchase price of building. Gen.St.1935, 60-1401.
The fact that seller of building, which was severed from seller's land and removed to buyers' land, took a real estate mortgage covering buyers' entire debt to seller and purchased insurance under insurance clause of mortgage, did not constitute an "abandonment" of seller's right to consider the building as personalty, in accordance with provision in chattel mortgage against lien claimants who had performed services on buyer's land. Gen.St.1935, 60-1401.
The record in an action involving the foreclosure and priority of liens examined and held: (1) Under the circumstances narrated in the opinion, a party who paid a real estate mortgage, at the instance and request of the mortgagors, which had been recorded long prior to the performance of labor on the premises, and who was given a real estate mortgage on the land in lieu of the mortgage she had paid, was entitled to be subrogated to the rights of the former mortgagee, and to priority over the rights of lien claimants; (2) where a building was sold and a chattel mortgage was executed for the purchase price thereof, and other items, and recorded after the building had been severed from the land of the seller but before the building was moved to the land upon which lien claimants performed labor, the holder of the chattel mortgage was entitled to priority over lien claimants to the extent of the purchase price; (3) the extent to which priority was allowed by virtue of the chattel mortgage constituted the unpaid purchase price of the building; (4) the building under the express agreement of the parties, constituted personalty and remained personalty until the purchase price was paid and the right to regard it as personalty and to claim a prior lien to the extent of the purchase price was not abandoned.
Appeal from District Court, Shawnee County, Division No. 1; George A. Kline, Judge.
Action to foreclose a mechanic's lien on realty by M. J Finnegan against Chester E. Ihinger, Theo C. Landon, and others. From a judgment in favor of Theo C. Landon, the other defendants and the plaintiff appeal.
Judgment affirmed.
Frank E. Miller, E. R. Sloan, W. Glenn Hamilton, Floyd A. Sloan, and Eldon R. Sloan, all of Topeka, for appellants.
A. Harry Crane, Ward D. Martin, and George E. S. Crane, all of Topeka, for appellee.
This was originally an action to foreclose a mechanic's lien on real estate under the provisions of G.S.1935, 60-1401. It expanded into a contest involving the priorities of various liens. The plaintiff Finnegan, was denied a lien and while he appears on the records here as an appellant no abstract or brief is filed by his attorney. The defendant landowners, the Ihingers, have not appealed. The defendants, George Coon, Leo Sisco and Frank Whelan, the latter doing business as the Whelan Lumber Company, have appealed.
Frank Whelan, however, subsequently dismissed his appeal.
The contest here is between the two remaining appellants who claim first liens by virtue of G.S.1935, 60-1401, and the appellee, Theo C. Landon, who claims a first lien as to certain amounts by virtue of a chattel mortgage on the building which was sold by her to the Ihingers and which was moved onto the real estate in question. Appellee also claims a first lien by virtue of a real estate mortgage which she obtained on the premises from the Ihingers when she paid, at the request of Ihingers, a former first real estate mortgage on the land which had been given and recorded by the Ihingers about three years prior to the performance of labor and the furnishing of materials by appellants. This first lien appellee claims upon the theory of subrogation.
Appellee had taken a chattel mortgage upon the building in question for the purchase price thereof and for some other items. That mortgage was executed and recorded after the building was severed from the foundation on appellee's land and before it was moved from the land of appellee to the premises of the Ihingers. It is concerning the judgment which gave appellee priority of liens as to certain amounts that appellants complain.
The court made the following extensive findings of fact, which are not challenged:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Criss v. Folger Drilling Co.
...in this jurisdiction see, Gray v. Zellmer, 66 Kan. 514, 72 P. 228; Lynds v. Van Valkenburgh, 77 Kan. 24, 93 P. 615; Finnegan v. Ihinger, 150 Kan. 357, 92 P.2d 538; Katschor v. Ley, 153 Kan. 569, 113 P.2d 127; and Tillotson v. Goodman, 154 Kan. 31, 114 P.2d In 50 Am.Jur., Subrogation, § 133,......
-
National Supply Co., a Div. of ARMCO, Inc. v. Case Oil & Gas, Inc., 62350
...is not entitled to priority for another reason. KEM has priority because of its purchase money security interest. In Finnegan v. Ihinger, 150 Kan. 357, 92 P.2d 538 (1939), a pre-Code case, one issue was whether a purchase money chattel mortgage effective April 23, 1937, was entitled to prio......
-
IN RE CREW'S CHRYSLER-PLYMOUTH, INC.
...to execution levy and forced sale to pay for the windmill and grinder as improvements to the realty." In Finnegan v. Ihinger, 150 Kan. 357, 364, 92 P.2d 538, 543 (1939), when referring to a chattel mortgage which provided that a building on land constituting personalty, the Court stated, in......