First N. Bank v. Ladd
| Decision Date | 06 May 1889 |
| Docket Number | 189 |
| Citation | 17 A. 750,126 Pa. 188 |
| Parties | FIRST N. BANK v. CHAS. K. LADD ET AL |
| Court | Pennsylvania Supreme Court |
Argued March 20, 1889
ERROR TO THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF BRADFORD COUNTY.
No. 189 July Term 1888, Sup. Ct.; court below No. 593 February Term 1885, C.P.
On January 27, 1885, The First National Bank of Towanda issued an attachment execution on a judgment for $7,200 against C M. Manville, and summoned E. T. Fox and others as garnishees.
The answers filed by Fox to the interrogatories of the plaintiff so far as essential to the case, were as follows:
Answer to 2d interrogatory: On November 25, 1884, the said C. M Manville owed me $1,000 for which I held his judgment note. That day he assigned to me as collateral security a judgment he held against N. P. Hicks for $4,650 which was entered in said Court of Common Pleas to No. 551 December Term 1884. Said assignment filed in said No. is as follows, viz "For value received to me in hand made, I do assign the above described judgment to E. T. Fox, subject, however, to an assignment made by me to Mrs. M. A. Lyman on the 17th November 1884, of $500 interest in the same. Towanda, November 25, 1884:" Signed C. M. MANVILLE. Said assignment was filed November 26, 1884. At the same time I entered into a written agreement with the said Manville, as follows:
Whereas, C. M. Manville is the owner of a judgment in Bradford county Common Pleas, against N. P. Hicks, No. 551 December Term 1884, and E. T. Fox, and E. T. Fox, trustee, is the owner of several other judgments against said N. P. Hicks, and whereas executions have been issued upon all of said judgments, and the property of said N. P. Hicks is now advertised to be sold by the sheriff of Bradford county, the execution on the above described judgment of C. M. Manville being the first lien on the personal property of said Hicks; now, therefore, for one dollar paid to C. M. Manville by E. T. Fox, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, and for certain other considerations hereinafter named, the said C. M. Manville does hereby agree to divide the money arising from said sheriff's sale of personal property of N. P. Hicks which my be applicable to the execution in favor of said Manville, with E. T. Fox, in proportions of $4,650 to $1,000; that is to say, C. M. Manville represents $4,650, and E. T. Fox $1,000, and the money is to be divided between them pro rata, in that proportion. And in order to carry out said agreement, C. M. Manville and E. T. Fox will attend the sheriff's sale of said property, and will bid off such portions of the property as do not bring prices satisfactory to them, and dispose of it at private sale, and all the money received by said sheriff, that is applicable to said Manville's writ, and all the money received from such private sales of said property, shall be divided between said Manville and Fox in the proportion, above mentioned. And as a further consideration to said C. M. Manville by said Fox, the said E. T. Fox agrees that he will not sell the real estate of said Manville on a judgment now standing against C. M. Manville, at any time, unless requested to do so by C. M. Manville. Witness our hands this 25th day of November, 1884.
C. M. MANVILLE.
E. T. FOX.
On October 27, 1884, the said Manville had indorsed a note dated that day for $3,000 at three months, signed by the said N. P. Hicks, and which the said Hicks had obtained the money on from the Citizens National Bank of Towanda, and at that time, November 25, 1884, said Manville had assigned to said bank as collateral to said note certain obligations upon which the bank subsequently realized sufficient to reduce the amount due the bank at the present time on said note to $506.52. In the judgment taken against the said Hicks and by the said Manville assigned to me as above, the latter included the $3,000 note which he had indorsed October 27, 1884, as aforesaid, and said bank makes claim that, as I had knowledge of this fact, it is entitled to receive out of the money collected on said judgment No. 551 December Term, 1884, said balance of $506.52, and I have paid over with the consent of said attaching creditor said sum to said bank.
Answer to 3d interrogatory: Under the said agreement of November 25 1884, I attended the sale of said Hicks property and bid in all or nearly all of it when it was sold by the sheriff on execution issued on the judgment so assigned to me, and I have since sold the same except as hereinafter stated. I received from said sales less expenses $3,749.61 out of which I have taken to apply on my judgments against N. P. Hicks $663.65, my proportion under said agreement, leaving a balance of $3,085.96, being Manville's interest which was assigned to me as collateral security for the $1,000 note as aforesaid, less any interest Mrs. Lyman may have by virtue of her prior assignment. Prior to the service of said attachment said Manville had given Wm. Little, Esq., an order on me for $115 which I had accepted prior to said attachment, and the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brager v. Blum
...consideration is revocable, however, unless a writing or delivery of some item evidences its irrevocability. See First National Bank v. Ladd, 126 Pa. 188, 17 A. 750 (1889). An assignment made for consideration is 1. Turning to the present case, the court construes appellant's argument as fo......