Fort v. First Nat. Bank Of Bates-burg
| Decision Date | 13 April 1909 |
| Citation | 82 S. C. 427,64 S.E. 405 |
| Parties | FORT. v. FIRST NAT. BANK OF BATES-BURG. |
| Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
1. Banks and Banking (§ 153*) — Conditional Deposit—Claim of Thibd Person. Plaintiff deposited the purchase price of land with a bank under an agreement with the grantor that the deposit was to be subject to the payment of a mechanic's lien claim against the property, if such claim was established in a suit then pending. The bank was informed of the agreement, but subsequently paid out all of the deposit on the order of the grantor. Held, that the agreement made the deposit special to the extent of the lien claim, and the bank was liable to the purchaser for the amount of the judg ment recovered in the lien suit, and which was paid by the grantor.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Banks and Banking, Cent. Dig. §§ 484, 494; Dec. Dig. § 153.*]
2. Evidence (§ 171*)—Best and Secondary Evidence—Contents of Writing—Checks.
In an action against a bank on its liability on a deposit made by plaintiff for the vendor of property, on condition that the deposit be subject to a mechanic's lien claim against the property, evidence to show the money was paid to the bank by a check is not inadmissible as evidence tending to prove its contents without proof of the loss of the check, as the check is a collateral matter, and a question as to its contents or form is not the principal matter in dispute.
3. Banks and Banking (§ 153*)—Special Deposits—Effect of Deposit Slip.
A deposit slip is a mere acknowledgment by the bank that the amount named has been received, and does not purport to embody the contract between the parties, and cannot affect the rights of a person depositing money with the bank for another under an agreement between the depositor and the person for whose benefit the deposit was made that the deposit should be subject to a lien against property purchased by the depositor, where the bank has knowledge of the agreement and receives the deposit subject to the payment of the lien.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Banks and Banking, Dec. Dig. § 153.*]
4. Banks and Banking (§ 227*)—Deposits-Actions Against Bank — Evidence — Amount of Recovery.
Evidence, in an action against a bank to recover on a contract between the depositor, who was the purchaser of property, and the grantor, under which the deposit was to be subject to the payment of a mechanic's lien against the property, held to show that the contract was for the payment, not only of the original amount of the mechanic's lien, but for the costs and fees incident to a suit to enforce the lien.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Banks and Banking, Dec. Dig. § 227.*]
Appeal from Common Pleas Circuit Court of Lexington County.
Action by James C. Fort against the First National Bank of Batesburg. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.
Barrett Jones and Efird & Dreher, for appellant.
Graham & Sturkie and E. L. Asbill, for respondent.
The testimony tends to show these facts: In December, 1903, S. B. Coats offered to sell James C. Fort a house and lot in Batesburg, S. C, for $850, and Fort was informed that the First National Bank of Batesburg had a mortgage on the premises, and that Rogers Bayly was claiming a mechanic's lien thereon for $58. A suit was then pending in the common pleas court for Lexington county by Bayly as plaintiff against Coats and the First National Bank as defendants for the enforcement of the alleged mechanic's lien. Not desiring to assume the risk of this controversy, on December 8, 1903, plaintiff with Coats went to thedefendant bank, and the parties, at the suggestion and approval of the president of the bank, Dr. W. H. Timmerman, agreed that the purchase money should be paid into the bank, and that the bank should retain a sufficient amount of the funds to pay the Bayly claim after the settlement of the controversy. At this meeting Bayly notified plaintiff of his claim. The cashier at that time, Mr. W. W. Watson, was informed of the situation, and was asked by the president whether a portion of the purchase money could be left in the bank pending the settlement of the alleged mechanic's lien, to which the cashier replied that it could be done, provided the parties agreed, and he was instructed to that effect. The cashier then knew that Coats was willing to make such agreement, but he testified that Fort said he did not attach any importance to the Bayly claim. After the agreement mentioned, the plaintiff accepted the deed of the premises, and in the presence of the cashier delivered to Coats a check drawn by himself on the National Loan & Exchange Bank of Columbia for $850, payable to the order of Coats. Coats immediately indorsed this check, and deposited it with the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kaesemeyer v. Smith
... ... W. P. SMITH, Defendant; EXCHANGE NATIONAL BANK OF COEUR D'ALENE, IDAHO, Garnishee Defendant; A. B ... Farmers & Traders' ... Bank, 81 Mo. 404; Union Nat. Bank v. Dumond, 33 ... Ill.App. 102; Dumond v. s Nat. Bank, 33 ... Ill.App. 95; Hummel v. First Nat. Bank, 2 Colo. App. 571, 32 ... "In ... v. Safe Co., 184 Mass. 481, 69 N.E. 215; Fort v ... National Bank, 82 S.C. 427, 64 S.E. 405; First ... ...
-
Sawyers v. Conner
... ... Mary Sawyer against L. P. Conner, receiver of the First ... Natchez Bank. From a decree dismissing the petition, ... Covey v. Cannon, 104 Ark. 550, 149 S.W ... 514; Fort v. First National Bank of ... Batesburg, 82 S.C. 427, 64 ... ...
-
Carolina Life Ins. Co. v. Bank of Greenwood
...Bank of Batesburg, 82 S.C. 427, 64 S.E. 405, 406, cited by respondent, by analogy settles such contention of the appellant against it. In the Fort case the facts, briefly stated, were: One Coats to sell Fort a house and lot for $850, and Fort was informed that defendant's bank had a small m......
-
Fant v. Home Bank & Trust Co.
...a particularly designated purpose, the deposit is special, and title does not pass to the bank, which becomes a trustee. In Fort v. Bank, 82 S.C. 427, 64 S.E. 405, it was that a contemporaneous agreement between the depositor, the purchaser, and the bank, by which a sufficient amount of the......